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

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 74424 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #570 on: February 16, 2018, 10:05:20 PM »
That's not a straw man at all.  Someone did indeed post the photo as if it proved that the two items came into contact with each other before they were examined.  It may have been you who made the mistake of posting that photo, but I don't really recall now.

Your recall isn't any better than Day's.

Go back through the thread and find anybody saying that this photo proved that the two items came into contact with each other before they were examined.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #571 on: February 16, 2018, 10:06:16 PM »
Because the photograph of the items was taken while they were in the possession of the DPD.

And the other one wasn't?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #572 on: February 16, 2018, 10:07:42 PM »
That's just your speculation.  Day didn't say what in his mind timestamped the photo.

Wrong (again).

Day absolutely did explain why he recalls that the photo was taken on the 26th.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #573 on: February 16, 2018, 10:09:59 PM »
Huh?  Are you saying that Tague was not there wen he was struck?

Anyway this is another strawman.  When did I say that Tague was not questionable?  Tim stated as a fact that Tague was hit by a fragment from the head shot.  I merely pointed out that Tague disagreed.

So, you're allowed to "merely point out" but other forum members are not?

I am "merely pointing out" that Day said the photo was taken on the 26th.

You don't have to prove that Tague was correct but somehow I do have to prove that Day was correct.

Again, YOU are the hypocrite.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #574 on: February 16, 2018, 10:21:07 PM »
Wrong (again).

Day absolutely did explain why he recalls that the photo was taken on the 26th.

Speaking of an inability to understand what is written.

Mr. BELIN. I am going to now hand you what has been marked as 738 and ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is a photograph of most of the evidence that was returned to the FBI the second time on November 26, 1963. It was released to Agent Vince Drain at 2 p.m., November 26.

Where does Day even say when the picture was taken?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #575 on: February 16, 2018, 10:22:53 PM »
So, you're allowed to "merely point out" but other forum members are not?

I am "merely pointing out" that Day said the photo was taken on the 26th.

You don't have to prove that Tague was correct but somehow I do have to prove that Day was correct.

Again, YOU are the hypocrite.

You claimed that Day is correct.  I'm not claiming that Tague was correct.  That's the difference.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #576 on: February 16, 2018, 10:28:39 PM »
Speaking of an inability to understand what is written.

Mr. BELIN. I am going to now hand you what has been marked as 738 and ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. This is a photograph of most of the evidence that was returned to the FBI the second time on November 26, 1963. It was released to Agent Vince Drain at 2 p.m., November 26.

Where does Day even say when the picture was taken?

It is my belief that the items were photographed because they were being turned over to the FBI on the 26th.  Hell, the photo could have been taken the day before being turned over to the FBI.  That would still have Stombaugh analyzing the bag and blanket BEFORE the photo was taken.

Stombaugh analyzed those two items on the 23rd.  Assuming that you believe Stombaugh.  Do you?  Or is he wrong or lying, too?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #577 on: February 16, 2018, 10:35:40 PM »
You claimed that Day is correct.  I'm not claiming that Tague was correct.  That's the difference.

But, you did indeed chide Tim Nickerson when you asked him this question below...

"What makes you more authoritative on this than the guy who was actually hit?"

So, Tague could be wrong about when he was hit.  Right?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #578 on: February 16, 2018, 10:37:55 PM »
It is my belief that the items were photographed because they were being turned over to the FBI on the 26th.  Hell, the photo could have been taken the day before being turned over to the FBI.  That would still have Stombaugh analyzing the bag and blanket BEFORE the photo was taken.

So, all of your grandstanding about when the photo was taken was all a bluff.

Quote
Stombaugh analyzed those two items on the 23rd.  Assuming that you believe Stombaugh.  Do you?  Or is he wrong or lying, too?

I have no reason not to.  Unfortunately, all Stombaugh's analysis shows is that the fibers he found could have originated from the blanket.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7483
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #579 on: February 16, 2018, 10:41:03 PM »
But, you did indeed chide Tim Nickerson when you asked him this question below...

"What makes you more authoritative on this than the guy who was actually hit?"

So, Tague could be wrong about when he was hit.  Right?

Yes, Tague could be wrong.  I still want to know what makes Tim's opinion more authoritative.

 

Mobile View