JFK Assassination Forum

He had over 4 hours to do that.
The Bronson film briefly shows the Hertz Clock but I can't make out a time on it. Maybe somebody has a clearer copy. Let's say for the sake of argument it does say 12:25. So what. That leaves Oswald 5 minutes to stack the boxes. Not difficult at all.
You're overthinking this. We KNOW three shots were fired from the sniper's nest. We have 3 spent shells found in the nest and the three employees one floor below who not only heard the shots, but heard the rifle being cycled and shells hitting the floor. That tells us that the shooter overcame any obstacles you have imagined. That holds true no matter who you believe fired the shots from the sniper's nest.
Obviously, he was able to do that in time because he got off three shots after the limo turned on Elm St. The boxes were stacked by the window so obviously it was possible for Oswald to do that unless you want to argue he stacked the boxes after he fired the shots.
The shooter got all those things done which pretty much renders your arguments moot.
Do you think the boxes got there by magic?
I have no idea where you are going with this line of thinking. The boxes got stacked which proves the person who stacked the boxes had the time to do it.

You're overthinking this. We KNOW three shots were fired from the sniper's nest. We have 3 spent shells found in the nest and the three employees one floor below who not only heard the shots, but heard the rifle being cycled and shells hitting the floor. That tells us that the shooter overcame any obstacles you have imagined. That holds true no matter who you believe fired the shots from the sniper's nest.

You do not know anything, what is known is that you cannot and have not proven there were three shots. Your own posts do not support that you believe what you are stating. Three shells means nothing more than three shells. The witnesses on the floor below are two shot witnesses. BRW flat out stated there were two shots and Jarman and Norman both state the second shot was the head shot. Not one of them could be misconstrued as having supported an early missed shot.

These three are the witnesses you have stated could not be confused by the sound and they stated the first shot hit JFK and the second shot is the headshot. You also have stated that the second shot could be interpreted as a double sound from one shot and then question is that what 75% of the witnesses reported. A shot with a double sound, but not two separate shots.

The early missed shot is just all talk with no substance. There is no difference between you and any other three shot narrative. Wrong is wrong, no matter where you place the phantom shot, nothing more. You blindly adopted this theory, and it looks like you don't know how to get away from it given your history of defending it. Two shots explains everything, every aspect, three shots does not explain anything.

Well that’s the easiest way to resolve it I guess, except that his wife CONFIRMs that Rowland was trying to point out to her both the black man at SE window and the  man holding a gun at SE window and that Rowland thought the gun resembled a hunting rifle with large scope. His wife was nearsighted and she was not wearing her glasses so it’s plausible she was not able to see detail that far away. Unlike Rowland who had better than 20/20  vision.

The  barracks wall of boxes , yes of course could have been stacked from 11:45. But those 3 boxes serving as a rifle rest could not been placed there before 12:20  cause BRW was there in the SN and the lower window was raised completely up if Rowland was observing  BRW “hanging out” the window.

Arnold Rowland never mentioned the elderly negro man in the snipers nest to his wife or anyone else for that matter, until he testified to the WC. Suddenly he invents this new person just for them.

Arnold description of the rifle guy. A heavy slender tall short guy?

Mr. SPECTER - Describe, as best you can, the appearance of the individual whom you saw?
Mr. ROWLAND - He was rather slender in proportion to his size. I couldn't tell for sure whether he was tall and maybe, you know heavy, say 200 pounds, but tall whether he would be and slender or whether he was medium and slender, but in proportion to his size his build was slender.

Huh. This is a description of a person? Really?
It only gets better. How tall seems like such a simple question. Not when you are fabricating this guy in your mind as you talk.     
                                         
Mr. SPECTER - Could you give us an estimate on his height?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; I couldn't. That is why I said I can't state what height he would be. He was just slender in build in proportion with his width. This is something I find myself doing all the time, comparing things in perspective.
Mr. SPECTER - Was he a white man or a Negro or what?
Mr. ROWLAND - Seemed, well, I can't state definitely from my position because it was more or less not fully light or bright in the room. He appeared to be fair complexioned, not fair, but light complexioned, but dark hair.

It is easy to understand why Barbara didn’t see the person. He did not exist.

The window is 29 inches tall and it starts 14 inches off the floor. He doesn’t know that because they finally ask him if he had ever been inside the TSBD. No
But his description of the person in no way reflects the correct window dimensions.

Mr. SPECTER - And how much, if any, of his body was obscured by the window frame from that point down to the floor?
Mr. ROWLAND - From where I was standing I could see from his head to about 6 inches below his waist, below his belt.
Mr. SPECTER - Could you see as far as his knees?
Mr. ROWLAND - No.
Mr. SPECTER - And what is your best recollection as to how close to the window he was standing?
Mr. ROWLAND - He wasn't next to the window, but he wasn't very far back. I would say 3 to 5 feet back from the window.
Mr. SPECTER - How much of the rifle was separated from your line of vision by the window?
Mr. ROWLAND - The entire rifle was in my view.

But he is not done yet. He is unstoppable with his description of what is impossible to see through a 29 inch window. Specter realizes he is making it all up as he talks.

Mr. SPECTER - And how much of his body, if any, was in the open view where there was no window between your eyes and the object of his body?
Mr. ROWLAND - Approximately two-thirds of his body just below his waist.
Mr. SPECTER - Up to what point?
Mr. ROWLAND - Mid point between the waist and the knees, this is again in my proportion to his height that I make that judgment.
Mr. SPECTER - So from the waist, some point between his knees and his waist, you started to see hi clear in the window?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - And from that point how far up his body were you able to see without any obstruction of a window between you and him?
Mr. ROWLAND - To the top of his head. There was some space on top of that where I could see the wall behind him.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate of the space between the top of his head and the open window at the perspective you were observing?
Mr. ROWLAND - Two and a half, three feet, something on that--that is something very hard to ascertain. That would just be an estimation on my part.

Barbara Rowland had never been told about an elderly negro man in the window by Arnold. Never did he mention it.

The elderly negro man in the snipers nest was invented just for the Warren Commission testimony. The first time heard anywhere.

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.

BARBARA ROWLAND

A Rowland told the WC his IQ was tested at 147
Not according to Barbara

Mr. BELIN. Do you know about what his grades were?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Varied.
Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by that?
Mrs. ROWLAND. He made A's and B's in some subjects, and he made C's and D's, I think, in other subjects.
Mr. BELIN. Was this before .you were married?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes. He says he has an A average, but I don't believe him.

________________________________________

Mr. BELIN. Why? Did he tell you that?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes. He told me that, because I saw a few of his report cards.
Mr. BELIN. Pardon?
Mrs. ROWLAND. I saw a few of his report cards and they weren't all A's.

The vanishing man with a rifle, Barbara has no problem seeing the window or a man there if there was one.

Mr. BELIN. I notice you are not wearing glasses now. Do you wear glasses?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes; sometimes.
Mr. BELIN. Are you near-sighted or far-sighted?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Near-sighted.
Mr. BELIN. Did you have any trouble looking at this window?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No; I saw the window plainly, and I saw some people hanging, looking out of some other windows, but he said that the man was standing in the background.
Mr. BELIN. Did he say about how far back?
Mrs. ROWLAND. I think he said about 12 feet, I don't know exactly.
Mr. BELIN. Did he say how much of the man he could see?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Apparently he could see at least from the waist up, because he said that the man was wearing a light shirt, and that he was holding the rifle at a port arms position.
Mr. BELIN. Did he say whether the man was white or colored?
Mrs. ROWLAND. He said he thought he was white.
Mr. BELIN. Did he say whether the man was an old man or a young man?
Mrs. ROWLAND. He said a young man.

The elderly wrinkled faced negro man in the Snipers Nest

Mr. BELIN. Did he say anything about any other people in any other windows?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No; I don't think so.

Barbara Rowland did not see anyone else on the same floor as the imaginary man on the other end of the TSBD

Mrs. ROWLAND. I am not certain whether he said or not. But I know there weren't any other people on that floor looking out the windows that could be seen from the outside.
Mr. BELIN. How do you know that
Mrs. ROWLAND. I mean I know they couldn't be seen from the outside, because I couldn't see them. I am nearsighted.

There was no one else on the 6th floor but there were on the floors beneath

Mr. BELIN. When you were glancing at that building, do you remember whether you glanced at it, say, within 10 minutes prior to the motorcade?
Mrs. ROWLAND. I don't remember. But most of the windows on that floor were closed, and the people who were looking out usually were looking out at an open window.
Mr. BELIN. Did you see any people look out of any open windows?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes.
Mr.. BELIN. About how many did you see all told, if you can remember?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Two or three, I think.
Mr. BELIN. Any more than two or three looking out of windows?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Not that I remember.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether or not any of those that you saw looking out of windows were looking out of the sixth floor?
Mrs. ROWLAND. They weren't.
Mr. BELIN. They were not? Were they on any floor higher than the sixth floor?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No.
Mr. BELIN. Were they all on floors lower than the sixth floor?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes.

Until the WC testimony, Arnold never mentioned an elderly negro man in the Snipers nest, to anyone.

Mr. BELIN. DO you know whether or not he told them, the police officers, that there was any other person on the sixth floor that he saw?
Mrs. ROWLAND. He never said that there was another person on the sixth floor, in my presence, that I can remember.
Mr. BELIN. Were you present when he was with the police officers?
Mrs. ROWLAND. At times.
Mr. BELIN. On Sunday morning, November 24th?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Were you personally with him throughout the time that he was
with the police officers?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And he, in your presence, never said that he saw anyone on the sixth floor other than the man with the rifle?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No. He never said in my presence that there was another man other than the man with the rifle on the sixth floor.

Barbara describes Arnold Rowland

Mr. BELIN. Well, this is really an unfair question for me to ask any wife about her husband, and I am not asking it very correctly, but---
Mrs. ROWLAND. At times my husband is prone to exaggerate. Does that answer it?
Mr. BELIN. I think it does.
Is there anything else you want to add to that, or not?
Mrs. ROWLAND. Usually his exaggerations are not concerned with anything other than himself. They are usually to boast his ego. They usually say that he is really smarter than he is, or he is a better salesman than he is, something like that.
Mr. BELIN. Anything else you care to add?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No, sir.

“It’s the arrangement of those 3 boxes that had to be completed before the Bronson film starts at 12:25 which is problem. It’s going to be really close if BRW did not leave that window until 12:23 cause the shooter has to wait for BRW to walk abut 160 ft and get on the elevator and operate it before the shooter could be confident BRW was gone from the floor.”

This is nothing but pure conjecture to think it was constructed after BRW left the floor. Where does that come from?
It could have been done before Givens returned to the 6th floor to retrieve his jacket and cigarettes. Remember Givens saw him walking from that direction.
Or done before BRW returned to the 6th floor.

Unfortunately, Rowland is every CT’s wet dream. The mistake is believing anything Rowland stated as having any basis in reality. After he said he watched the parade the WC should have said OK thanks for coming.  Reread Rowland’s testimony but this time read it with the idea you want to know how many times did the WC catch him fabricating stories or outright lying to them. He is that guy.

Here is a few. I counted at least 9 times. Start at the beginning when he is telling them he went to the eye doctor and his eyesight was better than 20-20. Then why was he there. It just gets worse from that point.

 There is no such thing as a 30 odd six rifle. You cannot tell the caliber of rifle by looking at it. Especially from 200 feet away. He knew it was a high powered scope, seriously.

His description of the guy in the window is ridiculous and completely wrong. Was the guy standing at the window or back inside the room.
Three different descriptions of the man he saw. When asked if he looked back at the 6th floor window after the shooting he said first no, then maybe, then yes. If you heard gunfire wouldn’t that be the first place you would look. At the place you supposedly saw a man with a rifle.

He used to go back to the building, look at it, and reconstruct the assassination in his mind. This is why they were making fun of him throughout the testimony. They knew he was lying to them and just a big BS artist caught up in the moment.

Eventually they had to bring his wife to testify about his believability.

Well that’s the easiest way to resolve it I guess, except that his wife CONFIRMs that Rowland was trying to point out to her both the black man at SE window and the  man holding a gun at SE window and that Rowland thought the gun resembled a hunting rifle with large scope. His wife was nearsighted and she was not wearing her glasses so it’s plausible she was not able to see detail that far away. Unlike Rowland who had better than 20/20  vision.

The  barracks wall of boxes , yes of course could have been stacked from 11:45. But those 3 boxes serving as a rifle rest could not been placed there before 12:20  cause BRW was there in the SN and the lower window was raised completely up if Rowland was observing  BRW “hanging out” the window.

SMG-

Thanks for your comments.

This is interesting, and keep in Latell is a CIA officer, not some loonie JFKA researcher (CT or LNT):

Latell’s chief revelation in Castro’s Secrets is Aspillaga’s disclosure that, early in the morning of November 22, 1963, he was ordered to direct radio attention to Texas.  Aspillaga related that story to Latell in a CIA safe house decades ago. Latell confirmed it through declassified reports of two “reliable American intelligence community sources.”

Again, that is a little too specific for comfort. How would Cuban intel have foreknowledge something was brewing in Dallas 11.22...if they had no hooks into LHO?

Latell's work is echoed by former CIA operative Bob Baer in my other recent post. Please see.

The basic problem is the LNT is implausible. 

Shots on 11.22 in rapid cadence, gunsmoke in the GK, Gov JBC and his wife both testifying he was struck by a separate bullet from the one that hit JFK, someone with a bogus Secret Service credential in the GK area, and the inexplicable shot near Tague's feet.

Where the CT'ers have gone wrong is in trying to exonerate LHO. He is the best suspect for the TSBD6 sniper.

Where the LNT'ers have gone wrong is in dismissing evidence LHO was linked to Cuban intel.

It’s the arrangement of those 3 boxes that had to be completed before the Bronson film starts at 12:25 which is problem. It’s going to be really close if BRW did not leave that window until 12:23 cause the shooter has to wait for BRW to walk abut 160 ft and get on the elevator and operate it before the shooter could be confident BRW was gone from the floor.

The shooter has to walk 100 ft and squeeze thru narrow opening of the box wall and then he has to select which boxes  which he wants to use, slide 2 of them in the angle he desired , stack the 3rd box on the window ledge and he has to LOWER the window from its full half open when Rowland saw the black man “hanging out” the window. To the 15.5 in height it was in the Bronson film.

All of this moving of the 3 boxes in place and lowering the window was occurring AFTER Norman was at his 5th floor window from 12:23 till the 12:30 shooting started. Should not Norman heard something?

“It’s the arrangement of those 3 boxes that had to be completed before the Bronson film starts at 12:25 which is problem. It’s going to be really close if BRW did not leave that window until 12:23 cause the shooter has to wait for BRW to walk abut 160 ft and get on the elevator and operate it before the shooter could be confident BRW was gone from the floor.”

This is nothing but pure conjecture to think it was constructed after BRW left the floor. Where does that come from?
It could have been done before Givens returned to the 6th floor to retrieve his jacket and cigarettes. Remember Givens saw him walking from that direction.
Or done before BRW returned to the 6th floor.

Unfortunately, Rowland is every CT’s wet dream. The mistake is believing anything Rowland stated as having any basis in reality. After he said he watched the parade the WC should have said OK thanks for coming.  Reread Rowland’s testimony but this time read it with the idea you want to know how many times did the WC catch him fabricating stories or outright lying to them. He is that guy.

Here is a few. I counted at least 9 times. Start at the beginning when he is telling them he went to the eye doctor and his eyesight was better than 20-20. Then why was he there. It just gets worse from that point.

 There is no such thing as a 30 odd six rifle. You cannot tell the caliber of rifle by looking at it. Especially from 200 feet away. He knew it was a high powered scope, seriously.

His description of the guy in the window is ridiculous and completely wrong. Was the guy standing at the window or back inside the room.
Three different descriptions of the man he saw. When asked if he looked back at the 6th floor window after the shooting he said first no, then maybe, then yes. If you heard gunfire wouldn’t that be the first place you would look. At the place you supposedly saw a man with a rifle.

He used to go back to the building, look at it, and reconstruct the assassination in his mind. This is why they were making fun of him throughout the testimony. They knew he was lying to them and just a big BS artist caught up in the moment.

Eventually they had to bring his wife to testify about his believability.