Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting

[Richard Smith]

In her affidavit, Pauline Sanders confirms that Reid mentioned Oswald's lunchroom encounter with Truly which she attributed to them "evidently lunching."

What affidavit would that be?

All I have found is an FBI report dated 11/24/63 which claims that Sanders claimed that Reid had provided her information during a phone call earlier that day.

Wow.  You want to split hairs over whether her statement is in the form of an affidavit or statement given to the FBI when you erroneously claimed that I made up that Reid had talked to others to know that Oswald was seen on her floor?  How about sticking to the substance?  Reid was told by someone that Oswald had been in the lunchroom.  She claims to see a man in a white t-shirt after the event.  She claims it is Oswald but she barely knew him.  She describes him as wearing only a white t-shirt which seems extremely unlikely as described by Baker and Truly just moments before.  Maybe it was Oswald, maybe it wasn't.  It doesn't appear to make a lot of difference.  If that was the type of witness description given to link Oswald to the Tippit murder, you would cry about it until doomsday.  What point are you trying to make?  That you believe there is no doubt that she saw Oswald? 

[Martin Weidmann]

Wow.  You want to split hairs over whether her statement is in the form of an affidavit or statement given to the FBI when you erroneously claimed that I made up that Reid had talked to others to know that Oswald was seen on her floor?  How about sticking to the substance?  Reid was told by someone that Oswald had been in the lunchroom.  She claims to see a man in a white t-shirt after the event.  She claims it is Oswald but she barely knew him.  She describes him as wearing only a white t-shirt which seems extremely unlikely as described by Baker and Truly just moments before.  Maybe it was Oswald, maybe it wasn't.  It doesn't appear to make a lot of difference.  If that was the type of witness description given to link Oswald to the Tippit murder, you would cry about it until doomsday.  What point are you trying to make?  That you believe there is no doubt that she saw Oswald?

You want to split hairs over whether her statement is in the form of an affidavit or statement given to the FBI

There is a massive difference between an affidavit and an alleged statement given to the FBI. Sanders would have read and signed an affidavit in front of a notary public. An FBI report, on the other hand, is an internal document which Sanders would never have seen or signed and thus could contain anything regardless if it was true or not. Presenting an FBI report as an affidavit is simply a misrepresentation of the facts.

when you erroneously claimed that I made up that Reid had talked to others to know that Oswald was seen on her floor?

Get your facts straight! I never made such a claim.... I just noticed that you went from "She may have talked to others" to "She had clearly talked to others" in two sentences and called it pure speculation which is exactly what it is. What's in that FBI report is at best hearsay!

How about sticking to the substance?  Reid was told by someone that Oswald had been in the lunchroom.

Who is that someone?

She claims to see a man in a white t-shirt after the event.  She claims it is Oswald but she barely knew him.  She describes him as wearing only a white t-shirt which seems extremely unlikely as described by Baker and Truly just moments before.  Maybe it was Oswald, maybe it wasn't.

In other words, you haven't got a clue if it was Oswald or not, but you go with that she was wrong anyway, based on something she may or may not have said to Sanders during a phonecall two days after the murder.

It doesn't appear to make a lot of difference.

You've said that before. So why bring it up?

If that was the type of witness description given to link Oswald to the Tippit murder, you would cry about it until doomsday.

And rightly so. The witness descriptions are all over the place. Baker thought he saw a brown jacket, Reid saw a white T shirt, Bledsoe allegedly saw a shirt with a hole in a sleeve, Whaley thought he saw two jackets and the descriptions of what Tippit's killer was wearing aren't much better.

What point are you trying to make? 

That you are merely speculating about what Reid saw and thought based on hearsay written in a non verbatim FBI report which you seem to accept blindly and without reservation.

[Walt Cakebread]

You want to split hairs over whether her statement is in the form of an affidavit or statement given to the FBI

There is a massive difference between an affidavit and an alleged statement given to the FBI. Sanders would have read and signed an affidavit in front of a notary public. An FBI report, on the other hand, is an internal document which Sanders would never have seen or signed and thus could contain anything regardless if it was true or not. Presenting an FBI report as an affidavit is simply a misrepresentation of the facts.

when you erroneously claimed that I made up that Reid had talked to others to know that Oswald was seen on her floor?

Get your facts straight! I never made such a claim.... I just noticed that you went from "She may have talked to others" to "She had clearly talked to others" in two sentences and called it pure speculation which is exactly what it is. What's in that FBI report is at best hearsay!

How about sticking to the substance?  Reid was told by someone that Oswald had been in the lunchroom.

Who is that someone?

She claims to see a man in a white t-shirt after the event.  She claims it is Oswald but she barely knew him.  She describes him as wearing only a white t-shirt which seems extremely unlikely as described by Baker and Truly just moments before.  Maybe it was Oswald, maybe it wasn't.

In other words, you haven't got a clue if it was Oswald or not, but you go with that she was wrong anyway, based on something she may or may not have said to Sanders during a phonecall two days after the murder.

It doesn't appear to make a lot of difference.

You've said that before. So why bring it up?

If that was the type of witness description given to link Oswald to the Tippit murder, you would cry about it until doomsday.

And rightly so. The witness descriptions are all over the place. Baker thought he saw a brown jacket, Reid saw a white T shirt, Bledsoe allegedly saw a shirt with a hole in a sleeve, Whaley thought he saw two jackets and the descriptions of what Tippit's killer was wearing aren't much better.

What point are you trying to make? 

That you are merely speculating about what Reid saw and thought based on hearsay written in a non verbatim FBI report which you seem to accept blindly and without reservation.

you are merely speculating about what Reid saw and thought based on hearsay written in a non verbatim FBI report

You're right Martin.... But unfortunately "speculation" is what we are left with.....  The Warren Commission and other government run "investigations" have provided few solid answers to the questions ....Thus we are left with speculating.....   

However.... I do believe that there is ample evidence to reach some solid conclusions that go to the heart of the case.   I'm not sure that debating Lee Oswald's movements inside the TSBD after the shooting will advance our understanding or establish any solid facts.

Lee Told the interrogators that he was in the first floor lunchroom when the parade passed by the building.   And he said that he saw Jarman and Norman enter the building at the time that he was in the lunchroom....  IMO.... that establishes the fact that he was not on the sixth floor.   

[Richard Smith]

You want to split hairs over whether her statement is in the form of an affidavit or statement given to the FBI

There is a massive difference between an affidavit and an alleged statement given to the FBI. Sanders would have read and signed an affidavit in front of a notary public. An FBI report, on the other hand, is an internal document which Sanders would never have seen or signed and thus could contain anything regardless if it was true or not. Presenting an FBI report as an affidavit is simply a misrepresentation of the facts.

when you erroneously claimed that I made up that Reid had talked to others to know that Oswald was seen on her floor?

Get your facts straight! I never made such a claim.... I just noticed that you went from "She may have talked to others" to "She had clearly talked to others" in two sentences and called it pure speculation which is exactly what it is. What's in that FBI report is at best hearsay!

How about sticking to the substance?  Reid was told by someone that Oswald had been in the lunchroom.

Who is that someone?

She claims to see a man in a white t-shirt after the event.  She claims it is Oswald but she barely knew him.  She describes him as wearing only a white t-shirt which seems extremely unlikely as described by Baker and Truly just moments before.  Maybe it was Oswald, maybe it wasn't.

In other words, you haven't got a clue if it was Oswald or not, but you go with that she was wrong anyway, based on something she may or may not have said to Sanders during a phonecall two days after the murder.

It doesn't appear to make a lot of difference.

You've said that before. So why bring it up?

If that was the type of witness description given to link Oswald to the Tippit murder, you would cry about it until doomsday.

And rightly so. The witness descriptions are all over the place. Baker thought he saw a brown jacket, Reid saw a white T shirt, Bledsoe allegedly saw a shirt with a hole in a sleeve, Whaley thought he saw two jackets and the descriptions of what Tippit's killer was wearing aren't much better.

What point are you trying to make? 

That you are merely speculating about what Reid saw and thought based on hearsay written in a non verbatim FBI report which you seem to accept blindly and without reservation.

I didn't say Reid was wrong about seeing Oswald.  I said "Maybe she did, maybe she didn't."  There is doubt.  After taking issue with that for some unknown reason Martin goes on to agree with me that her identification of Oswald as the person she spoke with is suspect! But chastises me for using "speculation" in reaching the very same conclusion he does.  LOL.  I referenced an account from Pauline Saunders that confirms that Reid had knowledge of the Truly/Oswald lunchroom encounter.  Something Martin was ignorant of when he suggested it was "completely unfounded speculation."  As Reid was not present in the lunchroom, that tells us she must have learned of the lunchroom encounter from someone else.  Who she learned this from is unknown but unless she was psychic we know from that information that she had discussed it to know it happened.  In fact, the call with Saunders is itself confirmation of the point that Reid was discussing the facts of the case with others.  Martin resorts here to the tired old nonsense about "accepting blindly" the FBI report.  Pathetic.  All this effort and he apparently agrees with me on the basic point that I was making.  There is doubt of Reid's encounter with Oswald.

[Alan Ford]

I didn't say Reid was wrong about seeing Oswald.  I said "Maybe she did, maybe she didn't."  There is doubt.  After taking issue with that for some unknown reason Martin goes on to agree with me that her identification of Oswald as the person she spoke with is suspect! But chastises me for using "speculation" in reaching the very same conclusion he does.  LOL.  I referenced an account from Pauline Saunders that confirms that Reid had knowledge of the Truly/Oswald lunchroom encounter.  Something Martin was ignorant of when he suggested it was "completely unfounded speculation."  As Reid was not present in the lunchroom, that tells us she must have learned of the lunchroom encounter from someone else.  Who she learned this from is unknown but unless she was psychic we know from that information that she had discussed it to know it happened.  In fact, the call with Saunders is itself confirmation of the point that Reid was discussing the facts of the case with others.  Martin resorts here to the tired old nonsense about "accepting blindly" the FBI report.  Pathetic.  All this effort and he apparently agrees with me on the basic point that I was making.  There is doubt of Reid's encounter with Oswald.

Ms Geneva L. Hine's testimony makes a nonsense of Mrs Reid's story! 

[John Iacoletti]

And he said that he saw Jarman and Norman enter the building at the time that he was in the lunchroom....  IMO.... that establishes the fact that he was not on the sixth floor.

There's no evidence that he said anything about them entering the building.  That's a Walt fabrication.

[Walt Cakebread]

There's no evidence that he said anything about them entering the building.  That's a Walt fabrication.

You know that's not true, John.....  Fritz jotted it down in his notes..... 

[Martin Weidmann]

I didn't say Reid was wrong about seeing Oswald.  I said "Maybe she did, maybe she didn't."  There is doubt.  After taking issue with that for some unknown reason Martin goes on to agree with me that her identification of Oswald as the person she spoke with is suspect! But chastises me for using "speculation" in reaching the very same conclusion he does.  LOL.  I referenced an account from Pauline Saunders that confirms that Reid had knowledge of the Truly/Oswald lunchroom encounter.  Something Martin was ignorant of when he suggested it was "completely unfounded speculation."  As Reid was not present in the lunchroom, that tells us she must have learned of the lunchroom encounter from someone else.  Who she learned this from is unknown but unless she was psychic we know from that information that she had discussed it to know it happened.  In fact, the call with Saunders is itself confirmation of the point that Reid was discussing the facts of the case with others.  Martin resorts here to the tired old nonsense about "accepting blindly" the FBI report.  Pathetic.  All this effort and he apparently agrees with me on the basic point that I was making.  There is doubt of Reid's encounter with Oswald.

After taking issue with that for some unknown reason Martin goes on to agree with me that her identification of Oswald as the person she spoke with is suspect!

You need to get off whatever it is you are on, because it's making you delusional. I never took issue about anything nor did I ever agree with you. In fact, I expressed no opinion either way. You are just making stuff up, as per usual.

But chastises me for using "speculation" in reaching the very same conclusion he does. 

The only conclusion I have reached is that you were speculating.

I referenced an account from Pauline Saunders that confirms that Reid had knowledge of the Truly/Oswald lunchroom encounter.  Something Martin was ignorant of when he suggested it was "completely unfounded speculation."  As Reid was not present in the lunchroom, that tells us she must have learned of the lunchroom encounter from someone else.  Who she learned this from is unknown but unless she was psychic we know from that information that she had discussed it to know it happened. 

All of this assumes that Sanders provided an 100% acurate account of her telephone call with Reid on 11/24/63. For all we know, Sanders may well have heard herself about the lunchroom encounter with Baker and Truly, which she then discussed with Reid on the phone and later simply got her "facts" mixed up or communicated them badly to the FBI agents. It even assumes that the FBI agents wrote what she said correctly in their report. You can not simply assume that Reid must have heard it from somebody, only based on what you believe Sanders said, because that is nothing more than pure speculation on your part. 

In fact, the call with Saunders is itself confirmation of the point that Reid was discussing the facts of the case with others.

Is it now? So, who initiated the call? Can you be sure that it wasn't Sanders who called Reid to discuss the case? And even if Reid was the one who called, do you really think she was the only TSBD employee who was talking to others about what had happened? I wouldn't be surprised if they all talked to eachother, which of course makes your "confirmation" nothing more than a meaningless worthless observation.

Martin resorts here to the tired old nonsense about "accepting blindly" the FBI report.  Pathetic. 

The main argument against releasing FBI reports to the public is that they often contain unverified and incorrect information about events and people gathered during an investigation. In other words, there is no guarantee that the information in those FD 302's is 100% correct. So, what is really pathetic is that you accept the content of such a report as if it was part of the bible.

All this effort and he apparently agrees with me on the basic point that I was making.  There is doubt of Reid's encounter with Oswald.

Wrong again... the "basic point" you were making is that your find Reid's statement unreliable based solely upon your own speculations about the meaning of a text in an FBI report. No way do I agree with that kind of crap.

As for there being doubt..... Sure there is. In this case it's everywhere you look, but for the most time you don't want to see or accept it unless you can use it in support of your own weak LN nut theory!