JFK Assassination Forum

I understand your zeal for the LN narrative, but I think you're grasping here. Reid (she says) encountered Oswald after she came back from watching the horrific JFKA. She was surprised to encounter Oswald (and only Oswald) on her floor and addressed him about the assassination. These were not ordinary circumstances. Unlike you, I have a difficult time believing she would not have recalled what Oswald was wearing by the time of her first (handwritten) statement THE NEXT DAY and her second one a couple of days later. Recalling an Oswald who was wearing a brownish jacket (or shirt) as wearing only a white t-shirt and specifically as neither wearing nor carrying a jacket would be a remarkably faulty memory.
"Wearing a lt. brown jacket" was one of the few details Baker noted in his handwritten affidavit that was apparently written THE DAY OF THE EVENT: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338819/m1/5/. He was not having to do much in the way of "trying to remember."

If we're honest, LNers and CTers alike "have a problem" with the reliability of eyewitness and earwitness testimony when it doesn't mesh with what they want to hear and "have no problem" when it fits what they want to hear. There is no reason to think that either Baker or Reid would be unable to remember accurately in these circumstances, yet there is a definite disconnect.

This episode illustrates why I have little faith in eyewitness accounts. Minutes apart Baker said Oswald was wearing a light brown jacket over some type of white shirt, then Reid said he was wearing a white t-shirt with no jacket or shirt over it. Both were partially right but got important details wrong because they simply didn't take note of what Oswald was wearing at the time. Why would they? This is typical of eyewitnesses. Are we supposed to believe that after his encounter with Baker, Oswald took his tan shirt off, walked past Reid with just the white t-shirt, then put it back on when he got on the bus and was spotted wearing the tan shirt by his former landlady. Or does it make more sense that Baker and Reid sort of got it right and sort of got it wrong. Putting it ALL the evidence together I conclude that Oswald was wearing both the tan shirt and white t-shirt when he shot JFK, with the tan shirt either partially or completely unbuttoned and that is what he was wearing when arrested and at all points in between. I also know that conflicts with what several witnesses along the way said and I don't care.

I will never understand why people put so much faith in eyewitnesses and accept what they tell us as established facts. When I see somebody start and argument with "So-and-so said that......", my reaction is STFU. Prove to me that what so-and-so said was accurate. Without corroboration, preferably by hard evidence and not another so-and-so, I'm just not going to buy it.

Donald Trump is alleged to have raped young girls provided to him by Jeffery Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Whether or not that’s true, he’s now figuratively raping American taxpayers by having his DOJ and IRS set up a slush fund of $1.8 billion to be dispersed to his allies, some of whom are the Jan. 6 zombies he encouraged to overthrow our Constitutional Federal Republic and keep him in office after he lost the 2020 election fair-and-square.

Alleged? No indictment. No trial. No conviction. But that won't stop the TDS crowd from swallowing the story hook, line, and sinker.

How did he encourage his followers to overthrow the government? By telling them to go to the Capitol and protest peacefully? I thought that was a constitutionlly protected right.

I didn't change the title.

Duncan must have.

-- Tom

After a a complaint (not from Lance) i changed the thread title to "This is for Nosenko lovers"

DVP -

Yes, it certainly occurred to me that allowing the "holding a coke" affidavit to see the light of day, even with the crossing-out by Baker, cuts against it having any dark significance. Still, considering how critical the issue is, it would have been wonderful if someone had grilled Baker and the FBI agent who (apparently) prepared it about the circumstances of its preparation and what (if anything) was said when Baker crossed it out. My point was more in the vein of how almost spooky it is that the JFKA is plagued with this sort of weirdness at every twist and turn; pretty much nothing is ever clean and simple.

And Bugliosi is certainly correct that Baker's and Truly's emphasis on how calm and collected Oswald was cuts against them having been coached to say the "right" thing. My puzzlement is strictly with this calm and collected behavior.

Compare Oswald's behavior to Rubys.

I see you started a thread about the Sawyer memo at the Ed Forum a year ago, which turned into an extended discussion: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31442-alan-fords-sawyer-memo/.

I think Pat Speer's take on the memo is probably correct:

It's clear to me that Sawyer conflated what he heard from a number of witnesses. The general description matches Brennan's first day statements. The Winchester comes from Euins' recollection of the sounds made by the rifle. These witnesses were filmed and photographed talking to the police, moreover. Long story short, the search for a mystery witness based upon some inconsistencies is folly, much as the reliance upon Holmes' delayed recollection Oswald said he was upstairs (something seized upon by the Bugliosi crowd) is folly.

Larry Hancock noted that it would be very odd for a witness to describe the age, height and weight but say absolutely nothing about the clothing.

The only way anyone would legitimately describe a rifle as a Winchester would be by seeing a lever action. If Euins described it as a Winchester based on the sound, that would be completely irrelevant.

So now we have an assassination plot with two gunman in the TSBD and their weapons of choice are a Mannlicher-Carcano and a Winchester lever-action? And they are both white males of almost exactly the same age and size? And one leaves the rifle and runs down the stairwell while the other runs out the back entrance carrying his rifle in full view? Weird conspiracy.

Where did the 30-30 bullets go? Maybe the Winchester guy panicked and ran without firing?

As Jonathan Cohen noted on the Ed Forum thread, isn't this the standard CT modus operandi - i.e., take an obscure document citing "an unidentified individual" that no one has ever regarded as being of particular significance and declare it the "smoking gun" that "proves a conspiracy"?