Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
I guess I need to say it a THIRD time. Researchers or people who have followed this case weren't aware of this truck and where it was from or located. We gave LHO residence as backdrop knowing they would be familar with his time in Fort Worth. Can't make it any clearer. We've written 7 articles on the laundry truck and you're stuck on this one aspect.  ::)

Pointing it out why though? What possible evidentiary value does that have?
32
Dear Royell,

Please note the distinctive "rocket ship flared-exhaust" design on the rear half of the car.

You never did answer my question:

What kind of strange-looking car is that to the left of "Fedora-Man-On-The-Island" in Wiegman, and why does it have the same kind of design on it that this beauty has?

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4908.0.html

-- Tom

                              I have consistently said that the Wiegman shows NO CAR parked alongside the Island. If you believe the Wiegman Film shows a car parked there, show it to me, or direct me where I need to go in order to actually see that 17.5 Feet Long and almost 5 Feet Tall car. The only people claiming to see a car alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film are: (1) YOU, and my good friend, (2) "THE NUTTY PROFESSOR". And "The Prof." only sees this car via his recently invented, "Shadow DNA". The absence of a car parked alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film, coupled with a car suddenly appearing there roughly 20 seconds later on the Darnell and Couch Films, is a Major JFK Assassination Discovery.
                              I have currently been working on ID'ing the registered owner of what I believe was an intended "getaway" car. I have recently made an additional discovery that I believe will lead to achieving this goal. I will soon be submitting my discovery to other JFK Assassination Researchers that hold opinions of value.
                                                ....................................  STAY TUNED  ..............................................................   
33
That little film clip demonstrates just how unreliable eye and ear witness testimony is. All those witnesses observed the same event and yet their accounts varied greatly. There was no consensus whatsoever. If all we had to go on was those accounts, we could conclude that most of them got it wrong. We wouldn't know which ones got it wrong and it's possible they could all be wrong but it is not possible they could all be right.

And yet, if the LNs are to be believed, all the witnesses in the Tippit shooting who identified Oswald were spot on. Go figure!
34
That little film clip demonstrates just how unreliable eye and ear witness testimony is. All those witnesses observed the same event and yet their accounts varied greatly. There was no consensus whatsoever. If all we had to go on was those accounts, we could conclude that most of them got it wrong. We wouldn't know which ones got it wrong and it's possible they could all be wrong but it is not possible they could all be right.
35
I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT. 
Not if their recollections conflicted with what the Z-film shows.
Quote

The arguments could apply to all the facts observed by witnesses, including the number of shots, just like this  :
BINGO!!! No eye or ear witness account should be accepted as factual without corroboration. If a witness tells us something, we should immediately tell ourselves, "That might or might not be true". We should then compare what that witness tells us to the body of evidence to see if fits or not. If an eyewitness account can neither be corroborated nor refuted, we should neither assume it is correct nor incorrect. It could be either. When I read or hear an eyewitness account and there is no other evidence to compare it to, I would consider it a coin flip whether or not that witness is correct. If I ever serve on a jury again and the prosecution's case rests primarily on the account of an eyewitness and there was no corroborating evidence, I would vote to acquit because I would certainly have reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused.
Quote

The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 6 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the number of shots fired? For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the number of shots?

The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds.  Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.

I'm saying no witness would have any idea what frame of the Z-film the second shot was fired at. Therefore any computation based on the elapsed time in the Z-film is meaningless in terms of corroborating the witnesses.
36
Once again, it's for researchers and people familiar with the JFKA. We are pointing to those who follow the JFKA of where LHO lived in Fort Worth with the proximity of Clean Towels business. Good grief, we aren't saying because LHO lived near Clean Towel means it was connected with him.  ::)

Pointing it out why though? What possible evidentiary value does that have?
37
The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 9 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the spacing of the shots. For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the spacing? Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots. If those people are correct, there were two gunman. Oswald could not have accurately fired his rifle that rapidly.

In stressful situations, events seem to speed up. After the first shot which missed, a lot of people weren't even aware there was an assassination attempt going on. JBC was one of the few exceptions. Once they saw, JFK's reaction to being hit by the second shot, suddenly the gravity of the situation would have become apparent to those people. It's not surprising that those people thought it SEEMED like the third shot came much more rapidly than it actually did. Things aren't always what they seem. People's ability to perceive and accurately remember an event like that is going to be compromised. That's why I have far more faith in one witness, Zapruder's camera, than all the other DP witnesses combined. That witness was not surprised by what happened. That witness was not experiencing stress. That witness viewed and recorded the event as calmly and accurately as it would a child's birthday party.

Keep putting total faith in your witnesses. It wii prevent you from ever learning the truth of the assassination.
I might suggest that one of the flaws in your approach is that you would not raise those arguments but would readily accept the evidence of witnesses if it fit with the second shot SBT. 

The arguments could apply to all the facts observed by witnesses, including the number of shots, just like this  :

The flaw in your approach is that you put absolute faith in witnesses' ability to accurately remember a bewildering event that popped up out of nowhere and took place over a period of about 6 seconds. Do you think any of those witnesses at the time was trying to discern the number of shots fired? For starters, many people did not even realize the first shot was a gunshot. Some didn't seem to hear it or if they did, thought it might have been a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire. So how could those people accurately describe the number of shots?
Quote
Then you have the witnesses saying there wasn't more than 2 seconds between the second and third shots.
The actual timing (z271-z313) is 2.3 seconds.  Would you expect any witness to say they thought they were 2.3 seconds apart? In whole seconds, not more than two seconds means less than three.
39
Once again, it's for researchers and people familiar with the JFKA. We are pointing to those who follow the JFKA of where LHO lived in Fort Worth with the proximity of Clean Towels business. Good grief, we aren't saying because LHO lived near Clean Towel means it was connected with him.  ::)

This is a new one.. because Lee Harvey Oswald lived near a towel business, the truck parked in Dealey Plaza must have been connected to the assassination?? Riiiiiiight. You have quite the imagination!
40
Did not Oswald supposedly make the bag out of TSBD paper and tape from the dispenser roll by that station on the ground floor of TSBD?

That would be Thursday morning  so that’s him planning something well BEFORE he had yet found out that Marina wanted a divorce.

For all Oswald knew, he was going home a day earlier this week because he hadn’t been able to see Marina the previous weekend because Ruth Paine was throwing a party and he had been told not to come.

That doesn't explain why he needed to come to Irving a day earlier than normal. That decision indicated a sense of urgency. Curtain rods wouldn't have created that urgency. A desire to see Marina wouldn't have created that urgency. Something else that was happening on Friday would have created that sense of urgency.
Quote

So wouldn’t Oswald be optimistic? A guy looking forward to seeing his wife and kids , for a long 3 day weekend yet he is also planning a murder?

Some have speculated that if Oswald had been successful in persuading Marina to reconcile with him, he would have abandoned his plan to assassinate JFK. There's no way we could ever know that. We are left to guess as to what his motive was for killing JFK and whether a reconciliation with Marina would have changed that.
Quote

He must have really wanted to move up from his mule job in the mafia to being a made man?

There is zero evidence Oswald was involved with organized crime. Or were you talking about Ruby?
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10