Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting  (Read 69517 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #480 on: March 01, 2019, 12:51:11 AM »
Advertisement
Mr. FRITZ. I can remember the thing that I said to him and what he said to me, but I will have trouble telling you which period of questioning those questions were in because I kept no notes at the time, and these notes and things that I have made I would have to make several days later, and the questions may be in the wrong place.

This is from the Gospel truth Warren Commission....Right?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #480 on: March 01, 2019, 12:51:11 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #481 on: March 01, 2019, 04:27:17 AM »
This is from the Gospel truth Warren Commission....Right?

...and your fabrication is more credible because...?

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #482 on: March 02, 2019, 12:59:14 AM »
...and your fabrication is more credible because...?

I can READ the scribbled notes....

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #482 on: March 02, 2019, 12:59:14 AM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4992
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #483 on: March 02, 2019, 03:08:56 PM »
So many words and nothing of any real value?..

Do you believe there is reasonable doubt that the person Reid encountered was Oswald or not?  Yes or no.  It's a simple question that I thought you had already answered in the affirmative.

Which only shows just how little you understand. There is no reasonable doubt to conclude that Reid did not see Oswald as he was leaving the building. The possibility that somebody may have told Reid about the lunchroom encounter, only seconds earlier, does not create reasonable doubt by itself. It would merely have explained to Reid where Oswald was coming from and how he came to be where she met him. There is in fact nothing reasonable about assuming that Reid may have lied about who she saw simply because somebody told her about what happened in the lunchroom. The mere fact that Oswald was in the lunchroom and was later seen by a reporter walking out the frontdoor after showing the man where the telephone was makes it nearly impossible to conclude anything else than that Oswald must have passed by the location where Reid said she was when she saw him. Even more so since you are unable to name anybody else who could have been there and also can not explain where Oswald went after the lunchroom encounter.

But, by all means, argue that Reid did not see Oswald pass by, as the consequence of that would automatically be that he didn't leave the building through the front door, withing three minutes after the shooting, which in turn may mean that Buell Frazier was correct when he said that he saw Oswald walking down Houston, coming from the loading dock area, towards Elm street some time after the shooting. That, of course, in turn destroys the entire bus/taxi saga.....

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.  That after 50 plus years I would need to conclusively identify to your satisfaction the person Reid spoke with (if anyone) to cast doubt on her identification of Oswald?  Is that the standard you apply to witnesses who ID'd Oswald at the Tippit scene?   

Oh boy, you don't even understand that there is a difference between a public street and a closed office building, do you now? Where anybody could have been at 10th/Patton when Tippit was shot, only a few people could have had access to the office space where Reid worked. So, where it is nearly impossible to name an individual on the street, it should be possible to determine who else could have been in that office space if it wasn't Oswald.

Again, it is remarkable that you are quibbling over there being doubt in this instance in which there are grounds for doubt while applying an impossible standard of witness identification in the Tippit situation to create false doubt.

Let's turn this nonsense around, shall we... In this particular instance, you use a non verbatim FBI report about an alleged conversation as sufficient grounds for reasonable doubt, but you completely ignore and dismiss all those other instances where far more compelling evidence than just an internal FBI report would more than justify reasonable doubt. Why is that?

Capt. Contrarian of all people suddenly disputing that there is no reasonable doubt of a witness identification in this case is truly mind blowing!  In this instance there is one witness.  She indicates that she barely knew Oswald, was made aware of his presence on her floor from another source, and then misidentifies the way he was seen dressed by others moments before her encounter.  Do you believe Oswald yanked off his work shirt after leaving the lunchroom but before encountering Reid and then put it back on?  And this reporter who allegedly ID'd Oswald is no more persuasive.  He encountered someone he didn't know and later thought it might have been Oswald.  Big deal.  Not a story you would accept in a million years if it lended itself to Oswald's guilt.  Makes a good story for a reporter.  But in the Tippit situation, there are multiple witnesses who place Oswald at the scene and you nitpick their every word to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion.  Very silly but highlights the bias and hypocrisy of your bizarre analysis.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2019, 03:13:03 PM by Richard Smith »

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #484 on: March 02, 2019, 04:31:02 PM »
Capt. Contrarian of all people suddenly disputing that there is no reasonable doubt of a witness identification in this case is truly mind blowing!  In this instance there is one witness.  She indicates that she barely knew Oswald, was made aware of his presence on her floor from another source, and then misidentifies the way he was seen dressed by others moments before her encounter.  Do you believe Oswald yanked off his work shirt after leaving the lunchroom but before encountering Reid and then put it back on?

Mr Smith makes some fair points here!  ???

Now! Ms G Hine did know Mr Oswald, and disliked him on account of his rude demeanor.

Yet she didn't notice him, or Mrs Reid, in the office just after the shooting. And she was desperate for information as to what had happened outside. The idea that her and Mrs Reid's paths wouldn't have crossed, and that she wouldn't have pumped Mrs Reid for information, is laughable!

Mr. BALL. Did you see Oswald come in?
Miss HINE. My back would have been to the door he was supposed to have come in at.
Mr. BALL. Were you facing the door he is supposed to have left by?
Miss HINE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Do you recall seeing him?
Miss HINE. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Do you have any definite recollection of Mrs. Reid coming in?
Miss HINE. No, sir


She doesn't want to outright call Mrs Reid a liar, but...  :D

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #484 on: March 02, 2019, 04:31:02 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #485 on: March 02, 2019, 05:33:09 PM »
Capt. Contrarian of all people suddenly disputing that there is no reasonable doubt of a witness identification in this case is truly mind blowing!  In this instance there is one witness.  She indicates that she barely knew Oswald, was made aware of his presence on her floor from another source, and then misidentifies the way he was seen dressed by others moments before her encounter.  Do you believe Oswald yanked off his work shirt after leaving the lunchroom but before encountering Reid and then put it back on?  And this reporter who allegedly ID'd Oswald is no more persuasive.  He encountered someone he didn't know and later thought it might have been Oswald.  Big deal.  Not a story you would accept in a million years if it lended itself to Oswald's guilt.  Makes a good story for a reporter.  But in the Tippit situation, there are multiple witnesses who place Oswald at the scene and you nitpick their every word to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion.  Very silly but highlights the bias and hypocrisy of your bizarre analysis.

As per usual, Richard can not answer any of the questions I asked. How typical!

In this instance there is one witness.  She indicates that she barely knew Oswald, was made aware of his presence on her floor from another source, and then misidentifies the way he was seen dressed by others moments before her encounter.

So now, suddenly, it's somehow a fact that she was made aware of his presence on that floor by somebody else, which caused he to make up a story, and that she misidentified the man or at least the way he was dressed? So much BS from the same guy who sees no reasonable doubt when Earlene Roberts, not only also only one witness, but one who was known for making up stories, claims Oswald put on a jacket as he left the roominghouse, when she said she was paying more attention to the television (and thus must have had her back turned to him as he walked through the room) and only saw Oswald for a second or so.

The double standard is mindboggling!

Do you believe Oswald yanked off his work shirt after leaving the lunchroom but before encountering Reid and then put it back on?

That's what this is really about, isn't it? You can't explain Reid seeing a white T shirt and so she must be wrong or lying. It's merely a way for you to dismiss inconvenient evidence. Never mind that you can not identify anybody else who could have been there and you also can't explain how Oswald could have left the building, within 3 minutes after the shooting, through the front door, as the WC claimed, if he had not walked through the office space where Reid said she was.

And this reporter who allegedly ID'd Oswald is no more persuasive.  He encountered someone he didn't know and later thought it might have been Oswald.  Big deal.

I agree, he could have misidentified Oswald. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the WC claimed that Oswald left the building through the front door within 3 minutes. If Reid and the reporter did in fact see somebody else, then where did Oswald go after the lunchroom encounter? Or was there even a lunchroom encounter at all? Didn't Baker first claim he had seen somebody on the 3rd floor?

Richard seems to be on a quest to singlehandedly destroy the WC narrative.... Brilliant!  Thumb1:

Not a story you would accept in a million years if it lended itself to Oswald's guilt.

I am not interested in Oswald's guilt or innocence. The man is dead. My only interest is to find out what really happened. But it seems there is just no pleasing you. I see no reason not to believe Reid's account and get attacked for it by a die hard LN who in truth needs that encounter to make a quick departure by Oswald from the building through the front door (which you always claim demonstrates consciousness of guilt) plausible, unless of course you can give me another route he could have taken to walk out of the frontdoor within roughly one minute after the lunchroom encounter.

But in the Tippit situation, there are multiple witnesses who place Oswald at the scene and you nitpick their every word to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion.

The first thing you fail to understand is that it is highly unusual that so many witnesses make the same identification. If a line up only produces positive identifications there is either something strange going on with either the witnesses or the line up itself. Having been a witness to a crime myself I know from first hand experience how difficult it is to positively identify an individual who you have only seen a few seconds running by! Despite the fact that they all gave different descriptions of the man they saw (which is what one expects from witnesses) they all nevertheless identify the same man..... Yeah right.

Very silly but highlights the bias and hypocrisy of your bizarre analysis.

The only bias I have is against the kind of dishonesty you display here on a daily basis.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2019, 06:58:17 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #486 on: March 02, 2019, 05:36:14 PM »
Mr Smith makes some fair points here!  ???

Now! Ms G Hine did know Mr Oswald, and disliked him on account of his rude demeanor.

Yet she didn't notice him, or Mrs Reid, in the office just after the shooting. And she was desperate for information as to what had happened outside. The idea that her and Mrs Reid's paths wouldn't have crossed, and that she wouldn't have pumped Mrs Reid for information, is laughable!

Mr. BALL. Did you see Oswald come in?
Miss HINE. My back would have been to the door he was supposed to have come in at.
Mr. BALL. Were you facing the door he is supposed to have left by?
Miss HINE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Do you recall seeing him?
Miss HINE. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Do you have any definite recollection of Mrs. Reid coming in?
Miss HINE. No, sir


She doesn't want to outright call Mrs Reid a liar, but...  :D

A witness who doesn't want to get involved often doesn't see things that happen in front of their eyes.

Alternatively, the mere fact that somebody did not see something does not mean it didn't happen.

You've got nothing at all, Mr. Ford

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #486 on: March 02, 2019, 05:36:14 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald in the TSBD just after the shooting
« Reply #487 on: March 02, 2019, 06:24:49 PM »
She indicates that she barely knew Oswald, was made aware of his presence on her floor from another source, and then misidentifies the way he was seen dressed by others moments before her encounter. 

What ?others?? Are you making stuff up again?

Quote
But in the Tippit situation, there are multiple witnesses who place Oswald at the scene

Correction: multiple people identified Oswald in unfair and biased lineups or from a single mug shot months later.