Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 74614 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #720 on: June 03, 2018, 04:17:45 AM »
You mean the pictures the esteemed Tim Nickerson just posted are of a grey jacket ?

Looks white to me.

Can you prove the jacket now in evidence was substituted for the one found and Saint Oz's shirt fibers were planted in it ?

You were doing better when you were contesting whether the half blind woman could see if Saint Oz was wearing a jacket.

BTW, Marty, got a huge kick out of you pointing out that the half blind woman might have been watching a TV that she didn't own.

That would make a world of difference !

Pathetic.

Isn't it funny how this star witness becomes half-blind and crazy again when she starts talking about the police car that went toot-toot?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #721 on: June 03, 2018, 04:20:56 AM »
..and that's supposed to prove that CE162 is Oswald's Jacket...how exactly?

Couldn't be.  They had on different jackets.

And you're assuming that the guy Markham saw and the guy Brewer saw were the same guy, because . . . ?


Quote
..and that's supposed to prove that CE162 is Oswald's Jacket...how exactly?

Yet one more straw man.  What is it with you and all of these straw man arguments?

Markham saw Oswald wearing a jacket.  What this is "supposed to prove" is that Oswald ditched his jacket at some point.  Why would he do that?


Quote
Couldn't be.  They had on different jackets.

Nah.

It's far more likely that one witness is wrong about the color of a killer's jacket than it is that the two witnesses saw different men flee, each saying that the man had a gun in his hands.  You do realize that Ted Callaway was only a half block away from Markham, right?  Reading your silly posts would lead one to believe that you thought maybe Callaway was miles away from the scene by the time he saw Oswald wearing a jacket while running with a gun.


Quote
And you're assuming that the guy Markham saw and the guy Brewer saw were the same guy, because . . . ?

"Number two was the man I saw shoot the policeman." - Helen Markham

Lee Oswald was the #2 man in the lineup.


Brewer pointed Oswald out to McDonald from the stage of the theater.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2018, 04:28:32 AM by Bill Brown »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #722 on: June 03, 2018, 04:21:21 AM »
All of the witnesses saw a gun in Oswald's hands.  You made the ill-advised attempt to imply that these witnesses saw nothing more than Oswald as being "a person near or some distance away from the scene of the shooting".  You conveniently left out the part where each witness stated he was running with a gun.

No, they saw a gun in the hands of a person who they identified in an unfair, biased, and unreliable lineup or from a single photo months later.

But since when does having a gun in one's hands prove that the person just murdered somebody?  I guess Callaway was guilty of murder too.  He had a gun in his hands at the scene of the crime.


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #723 on: June 03, 2018, 04:23:50 AM »
This is good enough for most people (well, those who aren't in serious denial about Oswald being a cop-killer):

Translation from Bill-speak:  "people who don't agree with my unsupported conjectures are in serious denial"

Feel free to point out where in that video Burroughs says he saw Oswald come in the theater.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #724 on: June 03, 2018, 04:24:36 AM »
You're the king of straw man arguments.

Howard Gee did not say that Oswald was guilty of murder just because he entered the theater without paying for a ticket.

I never said he did.  Nice, you made a strawman argument about a strawman argument.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #725 on: June 03, 2018, 04:27:58 AM »
If you were truly interested in what really happened, at the very minimum you would accept that Oswald was wearing a jacket as he left that house.

I accept that Roberts thought he came into the house and left wearing a jacket.  Just like she thought a police car pulled up and honked its horn twice.  Why is it that you consider your opinion and the truth to be synonymous?
« Last Edit: June 03, 2018, 04:40:34 AM by John Iacoletti »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #726 on: June 03, 2018, 04:30:38 AM »
Unrelated.

I'll ask again (since you avoided answering it the first time), Julia Postal left the booth and went out to the sidewalk.  Who do you suppose could have sold a ticket to Oswald?

Not unrelated at all.  You're assuming that Oswald entered the theater when Julia Postal left the booth and went out to the sidewalk, which you don't actually know because nobody saw him enter the theater.

Offline Michael Chambers

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #727 on: June 03, 2018, 04:32:44 AM »
A thing I see as a conundrum if you are saying the housekeeper saw him zipping a jacket is that you are
also saying Oswald couldn't be at the Tippit crime scene.


In that local TV started broadcasting JFK at 12.58pm. Sometime after this Earlene Roberts friend rings her to tell her of it.

Now we are at 12.59-1.00pm. Then or later Oswald/Unsub enters and spends 3-4 minutes in room. Then another 1 minute going to bus stop.

Oswald is at bus stop 1.05 -06pm when last seen, so possibly longer and Tippit is shot 1.08.30 latest.  8) ;) Walk: :) :)

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #728 on: June 03, 2018, 04:35:03 AM »
No, they saw a gun in the hands of a person who they identified in an unfair, biased, and unreliable lineup or from a single photo months later.

But since when does having a gun in one's hands prove that the person just murdered somebody?  I guess Callaway was guilty of murder too.  He had a gun in his hands at the scene of the crime.

Do you really want to compare Oswald running from the scene immediately after the shots rang out with a gun in his hands... with Callaway taking Tippit's service revolver and recruiting Scoggins' cab to go look for the killer at a point in time when Tippit's body was already headed to Methodist Hospital?

You're nuttier than a port?a-?potty at a peanut festival.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #729 on: June 03, 2018, 04:36:46 AM »
Translation from Bill-speak:  "people who don't agree with my unsupported conjectures are in serious denial"

Feel free to point out where in that video Burroughs says he saw Oswald come in the theater.

And you like to constantly accuse me of being the one who plays word games.  What do you have against the police?  I'm curious.

 

Mobile View