JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Rob Caprio on January 06, 2018, 05:28:55 PM

Title: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 06, 2018, 05:28:55 PM
Disclaimer: I will no longer respond to any posts that are off topic and/or meant to derail the issue of the opening post. This should not be taken as me running, but instead seen as me keeping the topic on track.

I have no issue with any WC defender, therefore, I am happy to discuss the case in a manner that uses the actual evidence with them. IF the WC was correct in their final conclusion as they claim then this should be no problem for them.

I will not participate in any personal discussions with them as these are meant to distract and discredit instead of focusing on the JFK assassination. I come here to discuss and learn about the JFK assassination and nothing more.
No more games with the LNers. The LNers have to to discuss the WC's, HSCA's and ARRB's evidence or move along.

***************************************

The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) and killed Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (JDT) on November 22, 1963. They further claimed that LHO was tracked to the Texas Theater (TT) and arrested because he was a suspect in the JDT murder.

As we have seen previously in this series there was absolutely no evidence that tied LHO to the JDT murder and certainly there couldn't have been any this soon after the shooting. What made the Dallas Police Department (DPD) think that LHO was the killer when there had been no All Points Bulletin (A.P.B.) issued for him and no arrest warrant? It seems his big offences supposedly were ducking, running and “looking funny.”

We have covered the arrest of LHO before in this series so I do not intend to cover all that again in this post. The purpose of this post is to look at the FIRST version of the arrest of LHO by Officer N. M. McDonald (NMM) to see how it compares with the official story given to us by the WC.


****************************************

On November 24, 1963, Officer N.M. McDonald's first person account of what occurred on November 22 at the TT was published in the Dallas Morning News (DMN). It has things in it that we won't find in the final official story.

In the DMN published account NMM says that while he was driving towards the Oak Cliff area there was a police broadcast regarding a tip that a “man acting funny was holed up in the balcony of the Texas Theater. . . . The cashier at the picture show was the one who called in to say this guy was acting suspicious and hidden out in the balcony.” (N. M. McDonald, "Officer Recalls Oswald Capture," Dallas Morning News, November 24, 1963, p. 13)

The official story doesn't claim that LHO was in balcony, and yet, there were several police transmissions saying that the “suspect” (again, how does ducking, running and looking “funny” make you a suspect in a cop killing is beyond me) was in the balcony. The WC would get help from Julia Postal in making it seem like it was no big deal in going down from the balcony, but the main point is that the WCR doesn't mention this voyage to the balcony.


Mr. BALL. I was trying to say the third row. How could he get from the balcony down there?

Mrs. POSTAL. Oh, that is very easy. You can go up in the balcony and fight straight down, those steps come back down, and that would bring you into it. He wouldn't have to go by Butch at all.

Mr. BALL. Oh, I see. And he could get into the balcony without Butch's seeing him?

Mrs. POSTAL. Yes; if Butch was down in the other end getting something.

The next comment in NMM's story is very interesting.

Quote on

A man sitting near the front, and I still don't know who it was, tipped me the man I wanted was sitting in the third row from the rear, not in the balcony. (Ibid.)

Quote off

Who was this man? We don't know as thirteen of the fifteen people in the TT went undocumented. Luckily, as we have seen previously in this series, one of the two witnesses may have identified this very helpful man for us.

Quote on

At the time the Warren Commission had me down there at the Post Office in Dallas to get my statement, I was afraid to give it.  I gave everything up to the point of what I gave the police there in town....I'm a pretty nervous guy anyway because I'll you what: After I saw that magazine where all those people they said were connected with some of this had come up dead, it kind of made me keep a low profile....(Jack) Ruby was sitting down, just watching them.  And when Oswald pulled the gun and snapped it at (McDonald's) head and missed and the darned thing wouldn't fire, that is when I tapped him on the shoulder and told him he had better move because those guns were waving around. He just turned around and looked at me.  He then turned around and started watching them. (Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, p. 352)

Quote off

If it was Jack Ruby who directed the police to LHO we can certainly see why the WC would want to alter this by claiming that it was Johnny Brewer who did this instead.

Quote on

Brewer met McDonald and the other policeman at the alley exit door, stepped out onto the stage them and pointed out the man who had come into the theater without paying. The man was Oswald.. (WCR, 178)

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0101b.htm

Quote off

We have covered Jack Ruby’s movements on November 22-24, 1963, before in this series and they showed that he was keeping tabs on LHO. Why would it be out of the question that he would be at the TT? This is speculation on my part (it has to be since the official investigation was so horrible) – perhaps Ruby told LHO to meet him there? We will never know for sure, but we can certainly understand why the WC could NOT tell us that the man who led the police to LHO in the TT was the SAME man who would gun him down two days later! Enter Johnny Brewer.

NMM's story then drops a bombshell on us.


Quote on

I went up the aisle, and talked to two people sitting about in the middle. I was crouching low and holding my gun in case any trouble came.

I saw him going for his gun and I grabbed him around the waist. (Ibid.)

Quote off

This is HUGE as it shows that according to NMM he had his gun already DRAWN when he reached LHO. Was LHO either suicidal or Chuck Norris? Why in the world would LHO even attempt to hit NMM or draw his own alleged pistol when NMM already had his gun DRAWN? This one point sinks the whole WC conclusion regarding what happened at the time of LHO's arrest.

This would explain why LHO was heard to be saying that he was NOT resisting arrest as seeing a cop coming towards you with a gun in his hand pointing at you would scare any normal person.

The whole story of NMM later on is contrived to make it appear that the DPD had a reason to arrest LHO when they really didn't. Even Scotland Yard couldn't have locked onto LHO so quickly even IF there was viable evidence pointing to him which of course there wasn't.

Since this account was published within days of the event it has to be considered to be the true version of events as the official narrative had not been invented yet. To say otherwise is to paint NMM and the DMN as liars.

We again see evidence in this post that illustrates that the WC’s conclusion is false, therefore, it is sunk once more.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bob Prudhomme on January 06, 2018, 07:02:58 PM
"At the time the Warren Commission had me down there at the Post Office in Dallas to get my statement, I was afraid to give it.  I gave everything up to the point of what I gave the police there in town....I'm a pretty nervous guy anyway because I'll you what: After I saw that magazine where all those people they said were connected with some of this had come up dead, it kind of made me keep a low profile....(Jack) Ruby was sitting down, just watching them.  And when Oswald pulled the gun and snapped it at (McDonald's) head and missed and the darned thing wouldn't fire, that is when I tapped him on the shoulder and told him he had better move because those guns were waving around. He just turned around and looked at me.  He then turned around and started watching them. (Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, p. 352)"

Who is being quoted in this paragraph, Rob?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 06, 2018, 10:11:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"At the time the Warren Commission had me down there at the Post Office in Dallas to get my statement, I was afraid to give it.  I gave everything up to the point of what I gave the police there in town....I'm a pretty nervous guy anyway because I'll you what: After I saw that magazine where all those people they said were connected with some of this had come up dead, it kind of made me keep a low profile....(Jack) Ruby was sitting down, just watching them.  And when Oswald pulled the gun and snapped it at (McDonald's) head and missed and the darned thing wouldn't fire, that is when I tapped him on the shoulder and told him he had better move because those guns were waving around. He just turned around and looked at me.  He then turned around and started watching them. (Jim Marrs, Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy, p. 352)"

Who is being quoted in this paragraph, Rob?

TT witness George Applin.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bob Prudhomme on January 07, 2018, 02:11:14 AM
Was this from an interview Applin had with Jim Marrs?

"....(Jack) Ruby was sitting down, just watching them." Has this been paraphrased from a longer sentence? What place was Jack Ruby in that Applin was able to see him?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 08, 2018, 12:30:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Was this from an interview Applin had with Jim Marrs?

"....(Jack) Ruby was sitting down, just watching them." Has this been paraphrased from a longer sentence? What place was Jack Ruby in that Applin was able to see him?

Yes.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bob Prudhomme on January 08, 2018, 07:39:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes.

Would you please elaborate a little on the Jack Ruby portion of the quote, and what you left out when you paraphrased the quote?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 08, 2018, 03:26:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Would you please elaborate a little on the Jack Ruby portion of the quote, and what you left out when you paraphrased the quote?

If memory serves (I.typed that many years ago) it was the way Marrs quoted it. Why don't you check the book? I don't paraphrase to cut things out. The cite is there so people can check out the source.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Mark Ulrik on January 08, 2018, 04:27:51 PM
According to this (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC) book, the Applin quote is from a 1979 DMN article by Earl Golz.

https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA361#v=onepage&q&f=false (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA361#v=onepage&q&f=false)
https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA486#v=onepage&q&f=false (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA486#v=onepage&q&f=false)

PS: Here is the article:

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/A%20Disk/Applin%20George%20Jr/Item%2001.pdf (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/A%20Disk/Applin%20George%20Jr/Item%2001.pdf)
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 08, 2018, 10:38:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
According to this (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC) book, the Applin quote is from a 1979 DMN article by Earl Golz.

https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA361#v=onepage&q&f=false (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA361#v=onepage&q&f=false)
https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA486#v=onepage&q&f=false (https://books.google.dk/books?id=KS-6XrdalGkC&pg=PA486#v=onepage&q&f=false)

PS: Here is the article:

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/A%20Disk/Applin%20George%20Jr/Item%2001.pdf (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/A%20Disk/Applin%20George%20Jr/Item%2001.pdf)

Thanks for posting.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 09, 2018, 12:32:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In the DMN published account NMM says that while he was driving towards the Oak Cliff area there was a police broadcast regarding a tip that a “man acting funny was holed up in the balcony of the Texas Theater. . . . The cashier at the picture show was the one who called in to say this guy was acting suspicious and hidden out in the balcony.” (N. M. McDonald, "Officer Recalls Oswald Capture," Dallas Morning News, November 24, 1963, p. 13)

Of course McDonald was doing his usual storytelling here, because how would he know what Postal said when she called in?  All he would have known is what the dispatcher said over the radio:

"10-4. We have information that a suspect just went in the Texas Theater on West Jefferson.
Supposed to be hiding in the balcony."

Postal couldn't have seen anybody sneak into the theater.  By her own admission she was out of her ticket booth at the time and facing west on Jefferson.  And when Brewer asked her if she sold a ticket to that man, she said "what man?".  She just relayed to the police what Brewer described as the person he saw in front of his shop who he also didn't see sneak into the theater.

As for the info that the "suspect" was in the balcony.  That couldn't have come from Brewer or Postal because Brewer had looked in the balcony and had seen no one there and then he went back out to tell Postal to call the police.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 09, 2018, 12:41:33 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course McDonald was doing his usual storytelling here, because how would he know what Postal said when she called in?  All he would have known is what the dispatcher said over the radio:

"10-4. We have information that a suspect just went in the Texas Theater on West Jefferson.
Supposed to be hiding in the balcony."

Postal couldn't have seen anybody sneak into the theater.  By her own admission she was out of her ticket booth at the time and facing west on Jefferson.  And when Brewer asked her if she sold a ticket to that man, she said "what man?".  She just relayed to the police what Brewer described as the person he saw in front of his shop who he also didn't see sneak into the theater.

As for the info that the "suspect" was in the balcony.  That couldn't have come from Brewer or Postal because Brewer had looked in the balcony and had seen no one there and then he went back out to tell Postal to call the police.






The only reason the Dallas Police came to the theater was because of a phone call from Postal with additional info by Johnny Brewer, how is any of this suspicious?



JohnM

Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 09, 2018, 01:43:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The only reason the Dallas Police came to the theater was because of a phone call from Postal with additional info by Johnny Brewer, how is any of this suspicious?

Where did the police dispatcher get the idea that the guy Brewer thought went into the theater was a) a suspect in the Tippit shooting, and b) hiding in the balcony?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 09, 2018, 02:51:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course McDonald was doing his usual storytelling here, because how would he know what Postal said when she called in?  All he would have known is what the dispatcher said over the radio:

"10-4. We have information that a suspect just went in the Texas Theater on West Jefferson.
Supposed to be hiding in the balcony."

Postal couldn't have seen anybody sneak into the theater.  By her own admission she was out of her ticket booth at the time and facing west on Jefferson.  And when Brewer asked her if she sold a ticket to that man, she said "what man?".  She just relayed to the police what Brewer described as the person he saw in front of his shop who he also didn't see sneak into the theater.

As for the info that the "suspect" was in the balcony.  That couldn't have come from Brewer or Postal because Brewer had looked in the balcony and had seen no one there and then he went back out to tell Postal to call the police.

McDonald kept changing his story, but the purpose of this post was to show his early comments and how they made the official narrative very unlikely.

This post also illustrates that the whole Brewer narrative was made up later on as no one early on mentioned him as the person who pointed out LHO.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 09, 2018, 02:54:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login





The only reason the Dallas Police came to the theater was because of a phone call from Postal with additional info by Johnny Brewer, how is any of this suspicious?



JohnM

Why would Postal call the police?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 09, 2018, 03:15:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would Postal call the police?




Do you think that Postal was involved?



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 09, 2018, 03:29:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where did the police dispatcher get the idea that the guy Brewer thought went into the theater was a) a suspect in the Tippit shooting, and b) hiding in the balcony?




a) The dispatcher who was an experienced Police Officer made a logical conclusion based on the strength of the accounts of two eyewitnesses who either worked directly at the theater or just up the road, as opposed to an anonymous tip.

b) Huh? Postal would have told them that.

Mr. BALL. Why didn't Warren Burroughs see him get in, get in there? Do you have any idea?
Mrs. POSTAL. We talked about that, and the concession stand is along here, and if he came in on the other end, which we summarized that is what Oswald did, because the steps, immediately as you open the door there. It has been done before with kids trying to sneak in, run right on up in the balcony.


Btw, I'll ask again was Postal and Brewer somehow involved?



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Chapman on January 09, 2018, 07:01:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where did the police dispatcher get the idea that the guy Brewer thought went into the theater was a) a suspect in the Tippit shooting, and b) hiding in the balcony?

Was your 'random guy' found in the balcony, John? He was found on the main floor. Brewer said it was the same guy he saw at his window.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Gary Craig on January 09, 2018, 07:17:00 AM
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/jfk20-20lho20arresr202.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/tippit-28.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/manheldonstepsofbalcony.jpg)
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 09, 2018, 07:29:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/jfk20-20lho20arresr202.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/tippit-28.jpg)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/manheldonstepsofbalcony.jpg)





The only man arrested at the Texas Theater was Lee Harvey Oswald.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Q4i75sYZmCw/UolprdLzkwI/AAAAAAAAw58/C7yvucFjo7c/s1600/135.+Oswald+Under+Arrest+(%231).jpg



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 09, 2018, 04:59:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
a) The dispatcher who was an experienced Police Officer made a logical conclusion based on the strength of the accounts of two eyewitnesses who either worked directly at the theater or just up the road, as opposed to an anonymous tip.

What makes you think the police dispatcher knew anything about these "two eyewitnesses".  And what exactly were they eyewitnesses to?

Quote
b) Huh? Postal would have told them that.

Mr. BALL. Why didn't Warren Burroughs see him get in, get in there? Do you have any idea?
Mrs. POSTAL. We talked about that, and the concession stand is along here, and if he came in on the other end, which we summarized that is what Oswald did, because the steps, immediately as you open the door there. It has been done before with kids trying to sneak in, run right on up in the balcony.


Huh?  Brewer looked in the theater, didn't see anyone in the balcony and then came out and told Postal to call the police.  Why would Postal tell the police that someone was hiding in the balcony?

Quote
Btw, I'll ask again was Postal and Brewer somehow involved?

Involved with what?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 09, 2018, 05:06:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Was your 'random guy' found in the balcony, John? He was found on the main floor. Brewer said it was the same guy he saw at his window.

So what?  Earl Crater said that the "same guy" used to sit and eat with Tippit and Ruby at the Pig and Whistle.  That doesn't make it true.  And last time I checked, looking nervous in front of a shop window is not grounds for arrest.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 09, 2018, 05:07:49 PM
Not being able to get their story straight about the details of the arrest is a sign of deception.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 09, 2018, 07:56:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



Do you think that Postal was involved?



JohnM

Why would Postal call the police?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 10, 2018, 03:33:45 AM
🔝
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 03:53:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would Postal call the police?



There was a Killer on the loose.
The Theater was a little over half a mile from where Tippit was killed.
Brewer observed Oswald ducking and hiding from the Police.
Why wouldn't Postal call the Police???



JohnM

 
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 07:03:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
  And last time I checked, looking nervous in front of a shop window is not grounds for arrest.



Punching a cop in the face and then trying to kill the cop with your revolver is extremely serious and will always be grounds for arrest, that is except in Iacoletti Fantasy Land(™).



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 07:33:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Punching a cop in the face and then trying to kill the cop with your revolver is extremely serious and will always be grounds for arrest, that is except in Iacoletti Fantasy Land(™).

Except for a couple of small details:

a) he wasn't arrested for "punching a cop in the face and then trying to kill the cop with his revolver"

and

b) you can't demonstrate with actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he punched a cop in the face and tried to kill a cop with a revolver.

What is "fantasy land" is the claim that he "punched a cop in the face and then tried to kill the cop with his revolver".
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Brown on January 10, 2018, 07:41:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Except for a couple of small details:

a) he wasn't arrested for "punching a cop in the face and then trying to kill the cop with his revolver"

and

b) you can't demonstrate with actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he punched a cop in the face and tried to kill a cop with a revolver.

What is "fantasy land" is the claim that he "punched a cop in the face and then tried to kill the cop with his revolver".

Everybody is lying (except Lee Oswald, of course).
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 08:53:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Everybody is lying (except Lee Oswald, of course).

Who's "everybody"?  Who even claimed that Oswald tried to kill the cop with his revolver?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on January 10, 2018, 09:13:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not being able to get their story straight about the details of the arrest is a sign of deception.

This from the very same guy who denies that he claims the evidence against Oswald is the product of fakery or lies and that he is not alleging a vast conspiracy.  But in every instance, he does exactly that.  Very humorous.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 09:25:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This from the very same guy who denies that he claims the evidence against Oswald is the product of fakery or lies and that he is not alleging a vast conspiracy.  But in every instance, he does exactly that.  Very humorous.

Quote me ever saying either of those things or (http://rs122.pbsrc.com/albums/o247/tae_666/PLURK%20EMOTICON/stfu.gif~c100).  Who do you think you're fooling?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on January 10, 2018, 09:29:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Except for a couple of small details:

a) he wasn't arrested for "punching a cop in the face and then trying to kill the cop with his revolver"

and

b) you can't demonstrate with actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he punched a cop in the face and tried to kill a cop with a revolver.

What is "fantasy land" is the claim that he "punched a cop in the face and then tried to kill the cop with his revolver".

The DPD approached a man who was reported as acting suspiciously in the vicinity both in place and time to a murder.  He had entered the TT without buying a ticket.  A crime itself.  Oswald died within 48 hours.  Well short of the statute of limitations expiring which would have allowed the DPD to charge Oswald with assault or attempted murder of a police officer.  Would they have ever done so?  Who knows?  Certainly not a numbskull like yourself.  When someone is charged with multiple murders there may be no reason to pursue lesser charges.  They can only execute a person once.  The fact that Oswald was not charged with assaulting a police officer before his death is certainly not evidence that it didn't happen even if you repeat that bizarre claim a thousand times.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on January 10, 2018, 09:35:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote me ever saying either of those things or (http://rs122.pbsrc.com/albums/o247/tae_666/PLURK%20EMOTICON/stfu.gif~c100).  Who do you think you're fooling?

So you are suggesting no one lied here and that Oswald did assault a police officer and pull a gun as the witnesses and evidence confirm?  If so, I was confused by your claim that some nefarious group of people couldn't get their story straight and were engaging in "deception."  Something that sounds like a lot of people lying and becoming part of the vast conspiracy.  You know - the one you are not suggesting even though time and again you are. 
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 09:47:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

you can't demonstrate with actual evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he punched a cop in the face and tried to kill a cop with a revolver.





Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he shot Tippit?
Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes.
Mr. BALL. What did he say.
Mr. FRITZ. He denied it---that he did not. The only thing he said he had done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, "That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I have done wrong."


Mr. BALL - Had you felt any movement of the hammer?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir. When this hand--we went down into the seats.
Mr. BALL - When your left hand went into the seats, what happened?
Mr. McDONALD - It felt like something had grazed across my hand. I felt movement there. And that was the only movement I felt. And I heard a snap. I didn't know what it was at the time.
Mr. BALL - Was the pistol out of his waist at that time?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Do you know any way it was pointed?
Mr. McDONALD - Well, I believe the muzzle was toward me, because the sensation came across this way. To make a movement like that, it would have to be the cylinder or the hammer.




JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 09:49:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The DPD approached a man who was reported as acting suspiciously in the vicinity both in place and time to a murder.

Not grounds for searching, beating up, or arresting somebody.

Quote
  He had entered the TT without buying a ticket.  A crime itself.

Red Herring.  He wasn't arrested for entering the TT without a ticket.  You can't even prove that.

Quote
Oswald died within 48 hours.  Well short of the statute of limitations expiring which would have allowed the DPD to charge Oswald with assault or attempted murder of a police officer.  Would they have ever done so?  Who knows?

LOL, that's some fancy dancing you're doing there.  None of this changes the fact that they arrested him for murder when they had no probable cause to do so.  The arrest report has checkboxes for "resisted", "fought", and "officer injured" and none of them are checked.

(https://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/apple/118/thinking-face_1f914.png)
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 09:54:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So you are suggesting no one lied here and that Oswald did assault a police officer and pull a gun as the witnesses and evidence confirm?  If so, I was confused by your claim that some nefarious group of people couldn't get their story straight and were engaging in "deception."  Something that sounds like a lot of people lying and becoming part of the vast conspiracy.  You know - the one you are not suggesting even though time and again you are.

Nice try.

You said "claims the evidence against Oswald is the product of fakery or lies and that he is not alleging a vast conspiracy.  But in every instance, he does exactly that."

You need to learn the difference between what somebody actually says and what you conclude with your trademark Richard Smith twisted-logic.  I've never alleged a vast conspiracy or that all the evidence against Oswald is the product of fakery or lies, and if you want to claim I did then provide the actual quotes, not your fake synopsis.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on January 10, 2018, 09:59:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not grounds for searching, beating up, or arresting somebody.

Red Herring.  He wasn't arrested for entering the TT without a ticket.  You can't even prove that.

LOL, that's some fancy dancing you're doing there.  None of this changes the fact that they arrested him for murder when they had no probable cause to do so.  The arrest report has checkboxes for "resisted", "fought", and "officer injured" and none of them are checked.

(https://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/apple/118/thinking-face_1f914.png)

Add Julia Postal to the vast conspiracy.  The one you are not alleging since she called the DPD and informed them that a man had entered the TT without buying a ticket.  Here you implying that she lied for some unknown reason if you think there is doubt.  The arrest report was made after they took him into custody and had linked him to the Tippit murder.  And obviously the murder of a police officer and President would be the important crimes to note.  And Oswald could have been charged with assault and attempted murder at any time before the statute of limitations expired.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:01:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote me ever saying either of those things or (http://rs122.pbsrc.com/albums/o247/tae_666/PLURK%20EMOTICON/stfu.gif~c100).  Who do you think you're fooling?



Exactly, who do you think you are fooling, your words and actions have consequence you attempt to cast aspersions on practically all of the evidence against Oswald which by definition must go somewhere but you are too gutless to go there, so you endlessly build your case of reasonable doubt which has ended up having a cast of virtually everybody that wasn't Oswald somehow being involved. :o



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:05:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Add Julia Postal to the vast conspiracy.  The one you are not alleging since she called the DPD and informed them that a man had entered the TT without buying a ticket.  Here you implying that she lied for some unknown reason if you think there is doubt.  The arrest report was made after they took him into custody and had linked him to the Tippit murder.  And obviously the murder of a police officer and President would be the important crimes to note.  And Oswald could have been charged with assault and attempted murder at any time before the statute of limitations expired.



Quote
Add Julia Postal to the vast conspiracy.

Yep, Iacoletti throws any one who doesn't comply under the bus. Then tomorrow he'll repeat again that the conspiracy was tiny and only needed one person who had access to the evidence.



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:07:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr. BALL. What did he say.
Mr. FRITZ. He denied it---that he did not. The only thing he said he had done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, "That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I have done wrong."

Yeah, I'm sure Oswald really said "I guess I deserved it".

Quote
Mr. BALL - Had you felt any movement of the hammer?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir. When this hand--we went down into the seats.
Mr. BALL - When your left hand went into the seats, what happened?
Mr. McDONALD - It felt like something had grazed across my hand. I felt movement there. And that was the only movement I felt. And I heard a snap. I didn't know what it was at the time.
Mr. BALL - Was the pistol out of his waist at that time?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Do you know any way it was pointed?
Mr. McDONALD - Well, I believe the muzzle was toward me, because the sensation came across this way. To make a movement like that, it would have to be the cylinder or the hammer. [/b]

LOL.  "the sensation came across this way".  There's some solid evidence.  ::)

Mr. WALKER - The gun finally got out of his belt, and it was about waist high and pointed out at about a 45 degree angle. I turned around and I was holding Oswald trying to get his arm up behind him in a hammeriock, and I heard it click. I turned around and the gun was still pointing at approximately a 45 angle. Be pointed slightly toward the screen, what I call. Now Hawkins was in the general direction of the gun.

But let's say for the sake of argument that it was actually pointed towards McDonald when something made a click.  And let's say for the sake of argument that the "click" was actually a trigger being pulled.  And let's even say for the sake of argument that it was demonstrably Oswald who pulled the trigger during the scuffle.  Even though all three of these haven't come close to being established as true, how does that demonstrate that Oswald tried to kill a cop?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:19:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Add Julia Postal to the vast conspiracy.  The one you are not alleging since she called the DPD and informed them that a man had entered the TT without buying a ticket.  Here you implying that she lied for some unknown reason if you think there is doubt.

I know what she informed them.  That doesn't mean that she saw it.

FBI report: "she was unable to recall whether or not he bought a ticket, but she believed he must have walked by her ticket booth"

Postal's testimony:
Mr. BALL. What did you see him do after became around the corner?
Mrs. POSTAL. Well, I didn't actually----because I stepped out of the box office and went to the front and was facing west. I was right at the box office facing west, because I thought the police were stopping up quite a ways.

Quote
  The arrest report was made after they took him into custody and had linked him to the Tippit murder.

How in the world do you know when they made the arrest report?  You just make this stuff up as you go along!

What is your evidence that Oswald was arrested for anything other than murder and assault to murder (of Connally)?  What you think they could have charged him with later is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:20:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LOL.  "the sensation came across this way".  There's some solid evidence.  ::)

Mr. WALKER - The gun finally got out of his belt, and it was about waist high and pointed out at about a 45 degree angle. I turned around and I was holding Oswald trying to get his arm up behind him in a hammeriock, and I heard it click. I turned around and the gun was still pointing at approximately a 45 angle. Be pointed slightly toward the screen, what I call. Now Hawkins was in the general direction of the gun.

But let's say for the sake of argument that it was actually pointed towards McDonald when something made a click.  And let's say for the sake of argument that the "click" was actually a trigger being pulled.  And let's even say for the sake of argument that it was demonstrably Oswald who pulled the trigger during the scuffle.  Even though all three of these haven't come close to being established as true, how does that demonstrate that Oswald tried to kill a cop?





Huh? This isn't a game Iacoletti, why would Oswald pull the trigger?



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:21:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Exactly, who do you think you are fooling, your words and actions have consequence you attempt to cast aspersions on practically all of the evidence against Oswald which by definition must go somewhere but you are too gutless to go there, so you endlessly build your case of reasonable doubt which has ended up having a cast of virtually everybody that wasn't Oswald somehow being involved. :o

LOL.  It's not my fault that your "evidence" is worthless.  That doesn't entitle you to make up positions to argue against instead of actually proving your case.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:24:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yep, Iacoletti throws any one who doesn't comply under the bus. Then tomorrow he'll repeat again that the conspiracy was tiny and only needed one person who had access to the evidence.

That's only because in the twisted LN world of false dichotomies a witness is either 100% correct or part of their strawman "vast conspiracy".  Except for witnesses that tend to exculpate Oswald and then they are either lying or mistaken and eyewitness testimony suddenly becomes unreliable.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:27:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LOL.  It's not my fault that your "evidence" is worthless.  That doesn't entitle you to make up positions to argue against instead of actually proving your case.




Quote
It's not my fault that your "evidence" is worthless.

Worthless? Two commissions came to the same conclusion based on evidence that you call "worthless". Maybe it's time for you to reevaluate your definition of the word "worthless"?

Quote
That doesn't entitle you to make up positions to argue against instead of actually proving your case.

Huh? My case has been proven multiple times, it's now up to you to show that there was a conspiracy and so far you and your team are trailing by 100 points in the last minutes of the final quarter.



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:28:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Huh? This isn't a game Iacoletti, why would Oswald pull the trigger?

Accident during a scuffle in which several hands are struggling to grab different parts of a gun?  What, do you have a crystal ball that determines intent?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:33:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That's only because in the twisted LN world of false dichotomies a witness is either 100% correct or part of their strawman "vast conspiracy".  Except for witnesses that tend to exculpate Oswald and then they are either lying or mistaken and eyewitness testimony suddenly becomes unreliable.



At its most basic the case is this, Oswald's rifle killed Kennedy and all the evidence leads directly to Oswald pulling the trigger and in return you have presented no other narrative because we both know you can't.



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:34:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Worthless? Two commissions came to the same conclusion based on evidence that you call "worthless". Maybe it's time for you to reevaluate your definition of the word "worthless"?

False appeal to authority.  The conclusion they came to was based on very little evidence that was all weak, circumstantial, tainted, and not subject to any kind of adversarial proceeding or cross-examination.

Quote
Huh? My case has been proven multiple times,

So you keep claiming without ever actually proving anything.

Quote
it's now up to you to show that there was a conspiracy

Why?  What conspiracy do you think I ever claimed?  And if "my team" can't prove a conspiracy, does it somehow follow that Oswald did it in Twisted-Logic-Land?  Your opinion wins by default?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:35:15 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Accident during a scuffle in which several hands are struggling to grab different parts of a gun?  What, do you have a crystal ball that determines intent?



Oswald's intent was clearly revealed when he removed the revolver from his pants.



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:36:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At its most basic the case is this, Oswald's rifle killed Kennedy

"Oswald's rifle".  LOL.

Great though -- arrest the rifle.

Quote
and all the evidence leads directly to Oswald pulling the trigger

Cite any evidence that "leads directly to Oswald pulling the trigger".

Quote
and in return you have presented no other narrative because we both know you can't.

You do think that your unsupported opinion just wins by default.  Unbelievable.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 10:37:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oswald's intent was clearly revealed when he removed the revolver from his pants.

No evidence of that either.  You're really batting a thousand.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:42:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
False appeal to authority.  The conclusion they came to was based on very little evidence that was all weak, circumstantial, tainted, and not subject to any kind of adversarial proceeding or cross-examination.

So you keep claiming without ever actually proving anything.

Why?  What conspiracy do you think I ever claimed?  And if "my team" can't prove a conspiracy, does it somehow follow that Oswald did it in Twisted-Logic-Land?  Your opinion wins by default?




Quote
False appeal to authority.  The conclusion they came to was based on very little evidence that was all weak, circumstantial, tainted, and not subject to any kind of adversarial proceeding or cross-examination.

Two commissions from two different time periods with two different sets of intentions both came to the same conclusion, go figure.

Quote
So you keep claiming without ever actually proving anything.

see above.

Quote
What conspiracy do you think I ever claimed?

That's right you can't claim a conspiracy because there isn't one.

Quote
And if "my team" can't prove a conspiracy, does it somehow follow that Oswald did it in Twisted-Logic-Land?

I can only follow the evidence Iacoletti, and don't you remember when you argued with Caprio for what seemed like months, you yourself said that "all the evidence leads to Oswald".



JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 10:44:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No evidence of that either.


"Yawn Emoticon"

Mr. BALL - And had he withdrawn the pistol
Mr. McDONALD - He was drawing it as I put my hand.




JohnM
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 11:04:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Two commissions from two different time periods with two different sets of intentions both came to the same conclusion, go figure.

Repeating a false appeal to authority a second time doesn't make it anything other than a false appeal to authority.

Quote
I can only follow the evidence Iacoletti, and don't you remember when you argued with Caprio for what seemed like months, you yourself said that "all the evidence leads to Oswald".

Yes I do.  So why then did you say that it was up to me to prove a conspiracy?  It seems your left hand doesn't know what your right hand is typing.

Yes, the little bit of weak, circumstantial and tainted evidence that there is points to Oswald.  But not beyond anything even approaching a reasonable doubt.  Especially for JFK's murder.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 10, 2018, 11:14:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Repeating a false appeal to authority a second time doesn't make it anything other than a false appeal to authority.

Yes I do.  So why then did you say that it was up to me to prove a conspiracy?  It seems your left hand doesn't know what your right hand is typing.

Yes, the little bit of weak, circumstantial and tainted evidence that there is points to Oswald.  But not beyond anything even approaching a reasonable doubt.  Especially for JFK's murder.



Quote
Repeating a false appeal to authority a second time doesn't make it anything other than a false appeal to authority.

So in other words, till they come up with the result you desire it will always be a "false appeal to authority", nice one!

Quote
Yes I do.

You remember the argument but you don't remember your endless squirming as Caprio was trying to throw you off the team but you insisted that the team still needed a waterboy, remember?

Quote
Yes, the little bit of weak, circumstantial and tainted evidence that there is points to Oswald.  But not beyond anything even approaching a reasonable doubt.  Especially for JFK's murder.

Ahhh that's right, you remember.



JohnM

Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 11:15:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"Yawn Emoticon"

Mr. BALL - And had he withdrawn the pistol
Mr. McDONALD - He was drawing it as I put my hand.


C'mon Mytton, how disingenous can you be?  If he was "drawing it" then it wasn't drawn yet.  Even by McDonald's account, the gun was still in his pants when McDonald grabbed it.

McDonald's December 3 report to Curry:

"With his right hand, he reached for his waist and both our hands were on a pistol that was stuck in his belt under his shirt. We both fell into the seats struggling for the pistol. ... I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip I heard the snap of the hammer and the pistol crossed over my left cheek, causing a four inch scratch".
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 11:19:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So in other words, till they come up with the result you desire it will always be a "false appeal to authority", nice one!

Nope.  A false appeal to authority is always a false appeal to authority.  You can either prove your case with evidence or you cannot.  "Authority concluded it" isn't evidence.

Quote
You remember the argument but you don't remember your endless squirming as Caprio was trying to throw you off the team but you insisted that the team still needed a waterboy, remember?

No I don't remember that because you're just making the whole thing up.  You're quickly swimming into Cakebread territory now, kook.  The only "squirming" I see here is from you and Richard Smith.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Martin Weidmann on January 10, 2018, 11:25:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Two commissions from two different time periods with two different sets of intentions both came to the same conclusion, go figure.

JohnM

Pretty pathetic argument.

The first commission was Warren's band of thugs, who claimed to hold an independent enquiry, but in reality only build a prosecutorial case against Oswald based on a pre-determined conclusion.

The second was the HSCA, which saw key investigators and members withdraw from it (and being replaced) because they felt that their attempt to hold an independent enquiry was being thwarted every step of the way.

Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 10, 2018, 11:43:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Pretty pathetic argument.

The first commission was Warren's band of thugs, who claimed to hold an independent enquiry, but in reality only build a prosecutorial case against Oswald based on a pre-determined conclusion.

And they just let the FBI spoon feed them their investigation.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Brown on January 11, 2018, 12:34:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The first commission was Warren's band of thugs, who claimed to hold an independent enquiry, but in reality only build a prosecutorial case against Oswald based on a pre-determined conclusion.

This only confirms what I already knew... that you've never read the Warren Commission Report.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Martin Weidmann on January 11, 2018, 12:39:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

And they just let the FBI spoon feed them their investigation.


Exactly...

The large number of assumptions in the WCR (frequently described as "preponderance of evidence") is staggering.

Even worse, when you try to find the "evidence" they base their conclusions on, it either simply isn't there or it is being misrepresented.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 11, 2018, 01:15:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
C'mon Mytton, how disingenous can you be?  If he was "drawing it" then it wasn't drawn yet.  Even by McDonald's account, the gun was still in his pants when McDonald grabbed it.

McDonald's December 3 report to Curry:

"With his right hand, he reached for his waist and both our hands were on a pistol that was stuck in his belt under his shirt. We both fell into the seats struggling for the pistol. ... I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip I heard the snap of the hammer and the pistol crossed over my left cheek, causing a four inch scratch".




Quote
If he was "drawing it"

As soon as Oswald's hand touched the revolver his intent was clear, the further act of withdrawing is just more devastating evidence.

Quote
McDonald's December 3 report to Curry:

Is this the same McDonald you implied wasn't exactly truthful and now you want to use him and interpret his words the way you want.



JohnM



Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 11, 2018, 04:07:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


There was a Killer on the loose.
The Theater was a little over half a mile from where Tippit was killed.
Brewer observed Oswald ducking and hiding from the Police.
Why wouldn't Postal call the Police???



JohnM

You do realize that Postal had no idea that a police officer was killed, don't you? Let me ask for a third time -- why would Postal call the police?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 11, 2018, 04:12:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Everybody is lying (except Lee Oswald, of course).

Since almost every word LHO supposedly uttered came to us from official sources, how do you know exactly what LHO actually said? Since you can't possibly know, why do you repeatedly accuse him of lying?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Mytton on January 11, 2018, 05:25:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You do realize that Postal had no idea that a police officer was killed, don't you? Let me ask for a third time -- why would Postal call the police?



Quote
You do realize that Postal had no idea that a police officer was killed, don't you?



No kidding Sherlock, I said a Killer was on the loose not specifically a cop killer.

JULIA POSTAL:  I told Johnny about the fact that the President had been assassinated.

And the Tippit reference was not what Postal said but the fact that the Police knew they were close and looking back I could have worded it better.

Quote
Let me ask for a third time -- why would Postal call the police?

And for the Gazillionth time, the Brewer observation alone would require an investigation but on top of Postal not selling Oswald a ticket and Oswald sneaking into a dark theater is classic villain type behaviour and made a Police visit imperative and what do you know the same man that acted suspicious on Jefferson was the same man that fled the depository 3 minutes after the assassination and the exact same man that was at the corner of Tenth and Patton, my God, what are the chances???



JohnM

Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: James Hess on January 11, 2018, 09:19:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




No kidding Sherlock, I said a Killer was on the loose not specifically a cop killer.

JULIA POSTAL:  I told Johnny about the fact that the President had been assassinated.

And the Tippit reference was not what Postal said but the fact that the Police knew they were close and looking back I could have worded it better.

And for the Gazillionth time, the Brewer observation alone would require an investigation but on top of Postal not selling Oswald a ticket and Oswald sneaking into a dark theater is classic villain type behaviour and made a Police visit imperative and what do you know the same man that acted suspicious on Jefferson was the same man that fled the depository 3 minutes after the assassination and the exact same man that was at the corner of Tenth and Patton, my God, what are the chances???



JohnM
;D
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 11, 2018, 05:13:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As soon as Oswald's hand touched the revolver his intent was clear, the further act of withdrawing is just more devastating evidence.

Well now you're backpedaling, because you claimed that Oswald "removed the revolver from his pants."

Quote
Is this the same McDonald you implied wasn't exactly truthful and now you want to use him and interpret his words the way you want.

You missed the point.  Not even McDonald the serial embellisher said what you claimed.  Nobody did.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 11, 2018, 05:14:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Since almost every word LHO supposedly uttered came to us from official sources, how do you know exactly what LHO actually said? Since you can't possibly know, why do you repeatedly accuse him of lying?

"a cop said it, I believe it, and that settles it"
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 11, 2018, 05:15:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




No kidding Sherlock, I said a Killer was on the loose not specifically a cop killer.

JULIA POSTAL:  I told Johnny about the fact that the President had been assassinated.

And the Tippit reference was not what Postal said but the fact that the Police knew they were close and looking back I could have worded it better.

And for the Gazillionth time, the Brewer observation alone would require an investigation but on top of Postal not selling Oswald a ticket and Oswald sneaking into a dark theater is classic villain type behaviour and made a Police visit imperative and what do you know the same man that acted suspicious on Jefferson was the same man that fled the depository 3 minutes after the assassination and the exact same man that was at the corner of Tenth and Patton, my God, what are the chances???



JohnM

The TT was miles from DP so why would she think the assassin was in her theater?

So supposedly "running, ducking and looking funny"  necessitates a police investigation? 🤣😆

Good one. So as usual you have nothing to present or cite. Got it.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 11, 2018, 05:18:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"a cop said it, I believe it, and that settles it"

Yep.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 11, 2018, 05:22:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And for the Gazillionth time, the Brewer observation alone would require an investigation

Sure, but illegally searching, beating up, and arresting someone for murder based on "looking funny" is not an "investigation".

Quote
but on top of Postal not selling Oswald a ticket

(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/postal2.jpg)
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/brewer2.jpg)

Quote
and Oswald sneaking into a dark theater is classic villain type behaviour

"classic villain type behavior".  Are you for real?

Nobody saw Oswald sneaking into a dark theater.  And even if they did, that calls for a beating?

Quote
and what do you know the same man that acted suspicious on Jefferson was the same man that fled the depository 3 minutes after the assassination and the exact same man that was at the corner of Tenth and Patton, my God, what are the chances???

The chances are 100% when you just assume that they were all the same man.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on January 11, 2018, 05:27:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You do realize that Postal had no idea that a police officer was killed, don't you? Let me ask for a third time -- why would Postal call the police?

Police cars and sirens were blaring all over that area.  In fact, Oswald drew the attention of Brewer when he apparently faced away from the police activity on the road in front of the store and theatre.  It was obvious to anyone in the area that something big was going on and that the police were looking for someone in that area.  Then Oswald enters the TT without buying a ticket.  A person Brewer has noticed acting suspiciously. 
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 11, 2018, 06:30:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Police cars and sirens were blaring all over that area.  In fact, Oswald drew the attention of Brewer when he apparently faced away from the police activity on the road in front of the store and theatre.  It was obvious to anyone in the area that something big was going on and that the police were looking for someone in that area.  Then Oswald enters the TT without buying a ticket.  A person Brewer has noticed acting suspiciously.

Nobody saw Oswald enter the theater without buying a ticket.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on January 11, 2018, 10:51:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Police cars and sirens were blaring all over that area.  In fact, Oswald drew the attention of Brewer when he apparently faced away from the police activity on the road in front of the store and theatre.  It was obvious to anyone in the area that something big was going on and that the police were looking for someone in that area.  Then Oswald enters the TT without buying a ticket.  A person Brewer has noticed acting suspiciously.

Perhaps he saw a pair of shoes at the time the police went by? This is not behavior that equates with being an assassin.

It is also possible that the police were HEADED to another area looking for someone. Your position is nothing but biased assumptions.

There is no evidence that shows LHO could have reasonably been a suspect that fast.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2018, 04:41:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where did the police dispatcher get the idea that the guy Brewer thought went into the theater was a) a suspect in the Tippit shooting, and b) hiding in the balcony?

Is it not reasonable to check out persons perceived to appear nervous—trying to dodge police cars—given the situation?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2018, 05:13:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Perhaps he saw a pair of shoes at the time the police went by? This is not behavior that equates with being an assassin.

It is also possible that the police were HEADED to another area looking for someone. Your position is nothing but biased assumptions.

There is no evidence that shows LHO could have reasonably been a suspect that fast.

More likely a person of interest at that point, given an alert citizen's observations.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 11, 2018, 05:15:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is it not reasonable to check out persons perceived to appear nervous—trying to dodge police cars—given the situation?

Checking out? Do the police usually send 15 officers to check out someone who appears nervous?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2018, 05:25:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Checking out? Do the police usually send 15 officers to check out someone who appears nervous?

You missed the part where I said 'given the situation'

Child, please: A cop shot dead in the area, and a POTUS assassinated a couple of miles away. Are you claiming this a 'usual' situation?

LOL
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 12, 2018, 01:57:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You missed the part where I said 'given the situation'

Child, please: A cop shot dead in the area, and a POTUS assassinated a couple of miles away. Are you claiming this a 'usual' situation?

LOL

What "situation?" List your evidence for showing why Brewer would think that LHO was a killer. Go ahead.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 12, 2018, 11:23:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is it not reasonable to check out persons perceived to appear nervous—trying to dodge police cars—given the situation?

"Check out" -- sure.  Illegally search, beat up, and arrest for murder -- not so much.
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Gary Craig on February 13, 2018, 03:02:04 PM
FIRST REPORTS OUT OF DALLAS
TAKEN FROM THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS,

11/25/63

-snip-

"In an article written for the Associated Press by Dallas policeman
M.N. McDonald and printed in this paper, he states: "I was cruising
towards Oak Cliff, across the river (Trinity that splits Dallas almost
in half). I got a call about 1:30 p.m. The radio dispatcher, G.D.
Henslee, first told me to check the alleys. The next tip was that a
guy that fitted the description they were giving was in a branch
library out in Oak Cliff. This didn't take long to be a phoney. The
next one said a man acting funny was holed up in the balcony of the
Texas Theater. I headed that way in a hurry. The cashier at the
picture show was the one who called in to say this guy was acting
supicious and hidden out in the balcony."


-snip-

------------------------------------------------------------------------

ASSINATION Or PRESIDENT KENNEDY
Officer Buddy Walther, Deputy Sheriff Dallas County Sheriff's Office

(Investigating officer most sign)
Date Nov 22, 1963

-snip-

"...we started towards 10th Street, where the police officer had
been killed in an effort to obtain further information and then received
radio information from Deputy Sheriff Bill Courson, who was also in the
Oak Cliff area, that the suspect was in the balcony of the Texas Theatre
on West Jefferson. We arrived at this location within a few seconds
and were met by many other officers. Upon proceeding to the balcony
of the theatre, I ordered the manager to turn on the house lights . Some
unknown officer was holding a white man at the steps of the balcony and
I proceeded on into the balcony. I looked over the balcony and saw a
commotion in the center section, near the back, in the downstairs of the
theatre, and I hollered to other officers, "He's downstairs" ., and we
all ran down the steps and to the area of the commotion. When I reached..."


-snip-
http://www.aarclibrary.org

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/29/2928-001.gif

November 23, 1963

Captain W.P. Gannaway
Special Service Bureau
Dallas Police Department

Thru:
Lieutenant Jack Revill
Criminal Intelligence Section
Special Services Bureau
Dallas Police Department

SUBJECT: PRESIDENTIAL ASSASSINATION
         LEE HARVEY OSWALD

Sir:

The following report is submitted for your information.

On November 22, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested
in the balcony of the Texas Theater, 231 West Jefferson Blvd
and was charged with the murder of President John F. Kennedy
and the murder of Officer J.D. Tippit.

Respectfully submitted,

L.D. Stringfellow, Detective
Criminal Intelligence Section
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Richard Smith on February 13, 2018, 03:49:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Nobody saw Oswald enter the theater without buying a ticket.

In her affidavit, Postal indicated that in her phone call to the DPD on Nov. 22 that she was asked whether the person had bought a ticket and she confirmed that he had not.  There is no evidence she or anyone else ever sold him one.  And we know Oswald entered the theatre because he was inside when the police arrived.  No movie ticket was found on him.  It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to reach a conclusion that Oswald entered the theatre without buying a ticket.  Although I still get a good laugh at your stupid suggestion that he could have bought a ticket that morning (even though the box office wasn't open until noon and there was no reason to so).  That kind of ad hoc desperation to keep hope alive despite all the evidence and circumstances to the contrary is dishonest and lazy but very amusing for its profound absurdity in someone who takes his self so seriously.

"The officer asked me if the man bought a ticket, and I told him no, he didn't."  Julia Postal - Dec. 4, 1963 Affidavit:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338516/m1/1/
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 13, 2018, 06:30:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In her affidavit, Postal indicated that in her phone call to the DPD on Nov. 22 that she was asked whether the person had bought a ticket and she confirmed that he had not.

She told both Brewer and the FBI that she didn't recall whether he had purchased a ticket.  When Brewer asked her about "that man" she said "what man?".  She also confirmed in her testimony that she stepped out of the box office and went to the front and was facing west at the time Brewer's man allegedly came around the corner of the theater entrance.

Quote
And we know Oswald entered the theatre because he was inside when the police arrived.

Yes, Einstein.  The question is *when* did he enter the theater.  Nobody actually saw him enter.  If he was buying popcorn at 1:07 as Butch Burroughs said, then Brewer saw somebody else.

Quote
  No movie ticket was found on him. 

That's about as compelling as "no lunch bag was ever found".  And who cares if he bought a damn ticket or not?  Does that somehow prove that he killed somebody?
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 13, 2018, 06:43:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
She told both Brewer and the FBI that she didn't recall whether he had purchased a ticket.  When Brewer asked her about "that man" she said "what man?".  She also confirmed in her testimony that she stepped out of the box office and went to the front and was facing west at the time Brewer's man allegedly came around the corner of the theater entrance.

Yes, Einstein.  The question is *when* did he enter the theater.  Nobody actually saw him enter.  If he was buying popcorn at 1:07 as Butch Burroughs said, then Brewer saw somebody else.

That's about as compelling as "no lunch bag was ever found".  And who cares if he bought a damn ticket or not?  Does that somehow prove that he killed somebody?

who cares if he bought a damn ticket or not?

Who keeps the ticket stub after they enter a movie theater??..... The floor is often littered with discarded ticket stubs.....
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 13, 2018, 11:49:23 PM
The whole Brewer story is highly suspicious. This wasn't even the first one given to us. This is from my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series.

Quote on

It should be pointed out that even this simple assertion CHANGED.  Initially, the person who "saw" this was the cashier (Postal) who became suspicious when she noticed LHO change from seat to seat.  But this stretched the bounds of believable, even for the DPD and Wade, as she was stationed OUTSIDE the theater so how could she see anything going on inside?  She couldn't.  Then the story became the USHER saw LHO changing seats. Why this was disregarded is NOT known, but it was.  Finally, we got the shoe store salesman, Brewer, noticing LHO "acting suspiciously" when a police car drove by, and he allegedly saw LHO duck into the theater without paying.  IF they couldn't get this simple part of the story correctly, how can we trust them with the bigger issues?

Quote off
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 14, 2018, 12:04:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
who cares if he bought a damn ticket or not?

Who keeps the ticket stub after they enter a movie theater??..... The floor is often littered with discarded ticket stubs.....

I don't believe Lee was ever asked if he bought a ticket?   Brewer just assumed the man that he saw looking in his shop window entered the theater without buying a ticket....even though it would have been very hard for a person to enter the theater at such a quiet time without being caught by he ticket taker Burroughs
Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Jerry Freeman on May 30, 2018, 03:15:07 AM
Julia Postal testimony before the WC
Quote
Mr. BALL. Now, as the car went by, you say the man ducked in, had you seen him before the car went by, the police went by?
Mrs. POSTAL. No, sir; I was looking up, as I say, when the cars passed, as you know, they make a tremendous noise, and he ducked in as my boss went that way to get in his car.
Mr. BALL. Who is your boss?
Mrs. POSTAL. Mr. John A. Callahan.
Mr. BALL. Where did you say he was?
Mrs. POSTAL. Yes; I say, they bypassed each other, actually, the man ducked in this way and my employer went that-a-way, to get in his car.
OK I give up..why did Callahan 'go get in his car'...and what ever happened to him after that?

Quote
Mrs. POSTAL...... No, sir; I told Johnny this.. so, I told Johnny about the fact that the President had been assassinated. "I don't know if this is the man they want," I said, "in there, but he is running from them for some reason," and I said "I am going to call the police, and you and Butch go get on each of the exit doors and stay there."
Hey, Julia really took charge there huh?
Quote
So, well, I called the police, and he wanted to know why I thought it was their man, and I said, "Well, I didn't know," and he said, "Well, it fits the description," and I have not---I said I hadn't heard the description. All I know is, "This man is running from them for some reason." And he wanted to know why, and told him because everytime the sirens go by he would duck and he wanted to know----well, if he fits the description is what he says. I said, "Let me tell you what he looks like and you take it from there." And explained that he had on this brown sports shirt and I couldn't tell you what design it was, and medium height, ruddy looking to me, and he said, "Thank you,"..........

In her 12-4-1963 affidavit, Julia stated...
Quote
Johnny Brewer asked me 'Did that guy buy a ticket'...I asked 'what guy?'
So she didn't even see the guy, she said.. but by the time of her WC testimony...she had supposedly described him to a tee in a phone call to the police. Not only that, but seemed to think he just might be the assassin they were looking for!!

Title: Re: Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions -- #441 (McDonald Pulls Gun)
Post by: Gary Craig on May 30, 2018, 04:47:39 AM
Most of the affidavits from JFK's murder investigation were taken and typed the day of the event.
Julia Postal's affidavit is dated December 4, 1963. Guess it took awhile to get the stories straight.
 ::)

(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/juliapostal.gif)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/juliapostal1.gif)