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

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 74606 times)

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #470 on: February 09, 2018, 08:19:03 PM »
Yes it would.

Of course.

Did Westbrook give the name of the officer who he gave the jacket to?

Did Westbrook give the name of the officer who he gave the jacket to?

I don't know. It's not in his testimony, but as an officer of the personal department you would think he would know the people he is working with, don't you agree?


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1593
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #471 on: February 09, 2018, 08:24:19 PM »
Did Westbrook give the name of the officer who he gave the jacket to?

I don't know. It's not in his testimony,

If it's not in his testimony then how would you expect me to know who he gave it to?

Quote
but as an officer of the personal department you would think he would know the people he is working with, don't you agree?

I would expect that he would know the people he is working with, but I wouldn't necessarily expect him to recall who it was that he passed the jacket to.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #472 on: February 09, 2018, 08:35:02 PM »
If it's not in his testimony then how would you expect me to know who he gave it to?

I would expect that he would know the people he is working with, but I wouldn't necessarily expect him to recall who it was that he passed the jacket to.

So, you agree that we have no way of knowing what happened to the jacket after Westbrook gave it to an unidentified officer and how it got to the police station? 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2018, 08:51:40 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #473 on: February 09, 2018, 08:55:14 PM »
They very well could have, since invalid lineups are invalid.  But since only one of them actually witnessed a crime, I'm not sure how it matters much who the other people saw.

By John's nutty logic no one in Ford's Theatre witnessed John Wilkes Booth shoot Lincoln.   They just heard a shot and looked in his direction to see him pointing a gun at Lincoln's head.  Thus, they did not actually witness a crime.  Cue sinister music. Perhaps Lincoln shot himself and Booth just picked up the gun.  It's possible right?  A hypothesis that must be disproved by others according to some CTers.  And I bet someone in the crowd didn't even describe his clothing with 100% accuracy.  Leaving open the possibility of a Booth double.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3419
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #474 on: February 09, 2018, 08:57:32 PM »
Would that include the two officers who saw the jacket in bright midday sunlight and described it as white?

Did one-eyed (half-blind to some) Earlene blink at the jacket in bright sunlight?
Were the lights even on in the room in which she watches TV?
Did Baker see Oswald's jacket in bright midday sunlight?
« Last Edit: February 09, 2018, 09:05:46 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #475 on: February 09, 2018, 09:10:11 PM »
Btw, how much is "astronomical"?

Mytton was asleep during math class.  Besides, nobody is arguing that there was anything "random" about the unfair lineups.

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #476 on: February 09, 2018, 09:12:24 PM »
You need to watch a video, because you have just made the best case possible for why the line up identifications can not be trusted. The odds of this happening are indeed astronomical!


Martin has harped on this being only a "circumstantial" evidence case apparently misunderstanding that this term doesn't mean weak.  He now informs us that direct evidence can't be trusted either.  That really narrows things down!  We are finally getting to the center of the lollipop, though.  At its heart what John and Martin are contending is that nothing can ever be proven if they don't like the implications.  The case against Oswald is the collective product of lies, fakery, unfairness, coincidence, police incompetence, chance, being unlucky, but never Oswald's guilt.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #477 on: February 09, 2018, 09:13:09 PM »
Did one-eyed (half-blind to some) Earlene blink at the jacket in bright sunlight?
Were the lights even on in the room in which she watches TV?
Did Baker see Oswald's jacket in bright midday sunlight?

Did one-eyed (half-blind to some) Earlene blink at the jacket in bright sunlight?
Were the lights even on in the room in which she watches TV?


Earlene Roberts watched TV in the living room which has several large windows.

Did Baker see Oswald's jacket in bright midday sunlight?

Baker saw Oswald's jacket? When and where?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #478 on: February 09, 2018, 09:14:29 PM »
By John's nutty logic no one in Ford's Theatre witnessed John Wilkes Booth shoot Lincoln.   They just heard a shot and looked in his direction to see him pointing a gun at Lincoln's head.  Thus, they did not actually witness a crime.

Yes, because somebody sitting in a theater box a few feet away from a person who has just been shot is exactly the same as someone a block or two away a few minutes later who didn't see anything happen.

And you call me nutty...

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7498
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #479 on: February 09, 2018, 09:16:15 PM »
Martin has harped on this being only a "circumstantial" evidence case apparently misunderstanding that this term doesn't mean weak.

True, but in this case the little evidence that you have is both circumstantial and weak.

 

Mobile View