Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 73611 times)

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #550 on: February 16, 2018, 07:45:40 PM »
That wasn't an answer, it was a non-sequitur.  How did Day know that this photo reflected the turning over of the evidence to the FBI for the 2nd time?  What in the actual photo signifies this?

You can't prove that he was right, and so you're grandstanding.  And around we go.

Another circular argument and a tautology.  The photo was taken three days after those items were examined by Stombaugh because Day said so, and Day was right because Day said so, and it doesn't show that the evidence could have been contaminated because Day was right.


Quote
That wasn't an answer, it was a non-sequitur.  How did Day know that this photo reflected the turning over of the evidence to the FBI for the 2nd time?  What in the actual photo signifies this?

You can't prove that he was right, and so you're grandstanding.  And around we go.

Then show that Day was wrong about the date the photo was taken.  Fair enough?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #551 on: February 16, 2018, 07:50:02 PM »
I'm not misrepresenting anything -- you're special pleading.  If you thought it was significant you would acknowledge it as a possibility like you do for the fibers coming from the blanket.  I haven't seen anyone post anything to show that they did.

I also haven't seen anyone post any proof that there were 5 shots, and both a Remington bullet and a Winchester shell disappeared from the Tippit crime scene and yet not only do you put that forward as a possibility, you actually assert that this is what happened.

You're a hypocrite.


Quote
I'm not misrepresenting anything -- you're special pleading.  If you thought it was significant you would acknowledge it as a possibility like you do for the fibers coming from the blanket.  I haven't seen anyone post anything to show that they did.

Of course it's a possibility that contamination could have occurred.  But, a photo taken three days after Stombaugh analyzed those items doesn't prove contamination.


Quote
I also haven't seen anyone post any proof that there were 5 shots, and both a Remington bullet and a Winchester shell disappeared from the Tippit crime scene and yet not only do you put that forward as a possibility, you actually assert that this is what happened.

The five shot scenario in the Tippit shooting is most definitely my opinion.  I've always stated it only as my opinion.


Quote
You're a hypocrite.

How so?
« Last Edit: May 10, 2019, 12:12:26 AM by Bill Brown »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8583
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #552 on: February 16, 2018, 09:00:51 PM »
Yes ....It's in an FBI report.    I made the mistake of saying that there were fibers found INSIDE of the sack  many years ago..... Someone corrected me and posted the FBI report  hat says there was only a single fiber found in the sack.

I'd be interested to see that report.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8583
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #553 on: February 16, 2018, 09:01:51 PM »

Then show that Day was wrong about the date the photo was taken.  Fair enough?

Then show that Day was right about the date the photo was taken.  Fair enough?

I'm comfortable saying "I don't know".  How about you?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #554 on: February 16, 2018, 09:04:35 PM »
Then show that Day was right about the date the photo was taken.  Fair enough?

I'm comfortable saying "I don't know".  How about you?

I'm open to accepting information which suggests that Day was wrong when he said the photo was taken on the 26th.  No one has provided any.  Until then, I accept that the photo was taken three days AFTER those items were analyzed by Stombaugh.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8583
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #555 on: February 16, 2018, 09:07:27 PM »
Of course it's a possibility that contamination could have occurred.

Thank you.

Quote
  But, a photo taken three days after Stombaugh analyzed those items doesn't prove contamination.

But a claim about when a photo was taken doesn't prove that's when the photo was taken.

Quote
The five shot scenario in the Tippit shooting is most definitely my onion.  I've always stated it only as my opinion.

ok

Quote
How so?

Because in one case you do nothing to prove that your opinion is true, but you demand that others do.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8583
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #556 on: February 16, 2018, 09:11:23 PM »
I'm open to accepting information which suggests that Day was wrong when he said the photo was taken on the 26th.  No one has provided any.  Until then, I accept that the photo was taken three days AFTER those items were analyzed by Stombaugh.

Cool.  I'm open to accept evidence that both of these photos were taken after Stombaugh analyzed the bag.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #557 on: February 16, 2018, 09:42:40 PM »
Thank you.

But a claim about when a photo was taken doesn't prove that's when the photo was taken.

ok

Because in one case you do nothing to prove that your opinion is true, but you demand that others do.

I haven't demanded a single thing of others.

Someone ill-advisedly posted the photo as if it proves that the blanket and bag came in contact with each other and therefore Stombaugh's analysis (that the fibers found inside the bag matched the blanket fibers) is irrelevant.  I am saying that Day stated the photo was taken on the 26th, three days AFTER Stombaugh examined the two items.  No one, including you, has shown otherwise.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #558 on: February 16, 2018, 09:45:52 PM »
Cool.  I'm open to accept evidence that both of these photos were taken after Stombaugh analyzed the bag.

No, you're not.

Day said that the photo was taken as they were turning the evidence over to the FBI for the 2nd time.  That, in Day's mind, timestamps the photo.

You automatically reject it because he's a police officer and therefore, dishonest or wrong.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8583
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #559 on: February 16, 2018, 09:52:40 PM »
I haven't demanded a single thing of others.

Someone ill-advisedly posted the photo as if it proves that the blanket and bag came in contact with each other and therefore Stombaugh's analysis (that the fibers found inside the bag matched the blanket fibers) is irrelevant.  I am saying that Day stated the photo was taken on the 26th, three days AFTER Stombaugh examined the two items.  No one, including you, has shown otherwise.

Nobody, including you, has shown that Day's claim was correct.  Too bad they didn't show Day this photo.




 

Mobile View