Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 138346 times)

Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #536 on: February 14, 2018, 09:09:34 PM »
Advertisement
Fibers....Plural???    There was only ONE fiber found in the paper sack.....

"Fibers....Plural???    There was only ONE fiber found in the paper sack....."

The first entry in the following says different.



« Last Edit: February 14, 2018, 09:14:52 PM by Gary Craig »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #536 on: February 14, 2018, 09:09:34 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #537 on: February 15, 2018, 02:40:03 AM »
No.  You prove that Day was wrong about the date the photo was taken.

I didn't claim that Day was wrong.  I asked you how you know Day was right.  You have no answer.

Quote
The photo was posted in an attempt to supposedly show that there was evidence contamination.

No, the photo was posted to show that there could easily have been evidence contamination.

Quote
Straw man.

It's not a strawman.  How do fibers allegedly found in a bag show who shot somebody?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #538 on: February 15, 2018, 02:42:48 AM »


"Could have originated from this blanket".  There's some solid evidence for you!  ::)

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #538 on: February 15, 2018, 02:42:48 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #539 on: February 15, 2018, 10:18:43 PM »
This is Bill Brown's thought process in a nutshell:

- Thinks it's significant that fibers in the bag could have come from the blanket in the garage

- Doesn't think it's significant that the bag could have been contaminated through improper evidence handling

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #540 on: February 15, 2018, 11:01:21 PM »
This is Bill Brown's thought process in a nutshell:

- Thinks it's significant that fibers in the bag could have come from the blanket in the garage

- Doesn't think it's significant that the bag could have been contaminated through improper evidence handling

I believe the fibers (plural) were ON the exterior surface of the bag....there was only a single fiber found inside the sack...

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #540 on: February 15, 2018, 11:01:21 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #541 on: February 15, 2018, 11:10:30 PM »
I believe the fibers (plural) were ON the exterior surface of the bag....there was only a single fiber found inside the sack...

Yes, but you never said why.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #542 on: February 16, 2018, 12:42:14 AM »
I didn't claim that Day was wrong.  I asked you how you know Day was right.  You have no answer.

No, the photo was posted to show that there could easily have been evidence contamination.

It's not a strawman.  How do fibers allegedly found in a bag show who shot somebody?

I've already told you twice now why Day would know the date of that photo.  You ignore it, but it doesn't mean I haven't answered you.

If you can't prove that Day was wrong about the date of the photo then you're only grandstanding.  Typical.

The photo was taken three days after those items were examined by Stombaugh, so it (the photo) in no way shows that the evidence "could easily have been" contaminated before Stombaugh's analysis.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2018, 12:49:25 AM by Bill Brown »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #542 on: February 16, 2018, 12:42:14 AM »


Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #543 on: February 16, 2018, 12:45:42 AM »
This is Bill Brown's thought process in a nutshell:

- Thinks it's significant that fibers in the bag could have come from the blanket in the garage

- Doesn't think it's significant that the bag could have been contaminated through improper evidence handling

When you have to lie in an attempt to prove a point, you have no credibility.

I have never said that it is insignificant that the bag could have been contaminated.  I just haven't seen anyone post anything to show that it was. 

If you wish, I can run around here attributing false statements and beliefs about you, too.  Why do you want to play that game?  Don't you think it's a bit dishonest?

Don't misrepresent my position.