Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The "Domino Room Alibi"  (Read 73140 times)

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #136 on: September 14, 2019, 06:26:34 PM »
Advertisement
I don’t want you to speak on Lance's behalf, you chose to join in to defend his legal reputation. Then his unsupported use of the word "seldom" to promote the rather puerile notion that by mentioning Jarman and Norman having lunch with him, would provide some form of alibi for Oswald.
 
Perhaps you could theorise (sic; British English?) why Bookout wrote that Oswald claimed they walked through the lunch room.

To pull "An Iacoletti," your saying it's unsupported doesn't make it so.

LOL

Question:  In which "lounge" did William H. Shelley normally eat lunch?  The first-floor Domino Room, or the elegant Second-Floor Lunch Room?

Did he specify, or did anyone else (for him) for that matter?

Warning:  That's not a rhetorical question.

--  MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 01:44:48 AM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #136 on: September 14, 2019, 06:26:34 PM »


Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #137 on: September 14, 2019, 06:33:42 PM »
Yes, proper syntax, grammar and vocabulary are essential, especially when trying to talk one's way out of a DUI, which I did four times, iirc, while I was still imbibing.

Care to rephrase the question (or was there more than one)?

--  MWT  ;)

Your first sentence explains a lot.....I won’t bother you in future.

PS You might let Lance know that Troy West was a better candidate for a phony Oswald alibi. Anyone who had bothered to analyse the testimonies would understand why.

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #138 on: September 14, 2019, 07:00:11 PM »
Your first sentence explains a lot.....I won’t bother you in future.

PS You might let Lance know that Troy West was a better candidate for a phony Oswald alibi. Anyone who had bothered to analyse the testimonies would understand why.

Really?  Explains what, exactly, Crow?

That you don't have a sense of humor?

Why the perpetual "attitude"?

FYI, I'm not in contact with Lance, seein' as how I'm no longer a member of the so-called Education Forum, I can't find him on Facebook, and I don't have his e-mail address.

Could you please get it for me?

As regards Bookhout, I suppose Oswald might have brazenly told him that he had seen Jarman and another Negro (Norman?) walking past the D.R. during lunchtime.  Since they evidently enjoyed slappin' the bones down, I would imagine that they would be in or around the D.R. from time-to-time, wouldn't you?

Another possibility is that Oswald, quiet as a mouse in the S.N., could hear Jarman and Norman "carryin' on," perhaps, one floor below him, and knew they must have walked past the D.R. to get there.

--  MWT  ;)

PS  I reiterate, what's with the attitude, Crow?
« Last Edit: September 14, 2019, 07:17:25 PM by Thomas Graves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #138 on: September 14, 2019, 07:00:11 PM »



Online David Von Pein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #140 on: September 14, 2019, 08:27:42 PM »
...maybe Jarman's using...the word "again" was analogous to kids these days sayin' "you know," again and again?

Or maybe it's similar to bus driver Cecil McWatters' continual use of the term "in other words".*

* For today's hunk of "Incredible (Albeit Meaningless) Assassination-Related Trivia" (pertaining to Mr. McWatters), click the
link below: 😁

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1242.html#Cecil-McWatters-In-Other-Words
« Last Edit: September 14, 2019, 08:59:11 PM by David Von Pein »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #140 on: September 14, 2019, 08:27:42 PM »


Online David Von Pein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #141 on: September 14, 2019, 11:18:36 PM »
A question to the original poster DVP. Do you think that Lance's use of the word "seldom" is supported by the evidence? If yes, please provide any references that support its use.

Although I can't be sure, it could be that Lance Payette's "very seldom" remark concerning Oswald eating lunch in the Domino Room was derived from this testimony provided by TSBD worker Billy Lovelady [at 6 H 337]....

Mr. BALL - Did Oswald ever eat lunch with you?
Mr. LOVELADY - He ate two or three times in that little domino room, but not by himself, with the rest of the boys.


Now, given the fact that Oswald was employed at the Book Depository for a little more than five weeks (27 work days to be exact* [October 16—November 22], not counting any Saturdays [and in his 2002 interview with Gary Mack, Wesley Frazier did say that the warehouse workers would sometimes work on Saturday]), I would say that "two or three times" (out of a possible 27) would, indeed, qualify as "very seldom".

* The above figure of "27 work days" does not include the date of Monday, November 11th, 1963, which was a federal holiday (Veterans Day), and we know that Lee Oswald spent that whole day at Ruth Paine's house in Irving, Texas.

Perry.....your witness. 😁
« Last Edit: September 15, 2019, 12:01:29 AM by David Von Pein »

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #142 on: September 14, 2019, 11:49:39 PM »



Perhaps you could theorise why Bookout wrote that Oswald claimed they walked through the lunch room.


Colin, I talked about this in my reply to David (page 6), inserted below

I guess he missed it, as he never replied to it.

I agree with everything you just said, Martin.

My earlier point was not that I believe Oswald was down on the first floor at about 12:25. (As I said previously, I definitely do not believe such a thing.) I merely was pointing out the fact that a 12:25 alibi is not the same thing as a 12:30 alibi. And 12:30, as we all know, is the key time here.

Fair enough, but then there is this; according to some interrogation reports Oswald made some vague comment about two negros being in (or walking through) the room where he was. Unfortunately, we don't really know what Oswald actually said verbatim, so we have to rely on the notes made by the interrogators and their choice of words for writing it in their report. However, having said that, I think that the combined reports do clearly suggest that Oswald did in fact make some comment about negros being in (or walking through) the room.

So, as he identified one of them by name, some time ago, I tried to establish a timeline for the movements of Jarman and Norman prior to their arrival at the 5th floor, and the conclusion was that these two men did indeed pass through the shipping area (visible from the Domino room) just minutes prior to the shooting. I am aware of the LN theory that Oswald first saw Jarman and Norman from the 6th floor window and later heard them talking (and identifying them) below him, which is why he concocted the story of seeing both men, but IMO that's a very weak narrative for two reasons; (1) During my visit to the TSBD, some years ago, I tried to look down to where I understood Norman and Jarman were supposed to have been and found it impossible to see that location from there and (2) if Oswald was able to identify both men by the sound of their voice, IMO those men on the 5th floor should also have been able to hear the movement on the floor above them, prior to the shots, which they didn't!

Which leaves me with a bit of a mystery. If I am being kind to Oswald, I could argue that he was indeed in the Domino room when he saw Norman and Jarman enter the loading area and walking towards the elevators, which means that it is possible that the interrogators simply were not precise enough in their reports.

So, here's the question; since we have already agreed that Oswald could have made it to the 6th floor in roughly the same time Norman and Jarman made it to the 5th floor, why are the LNs fighting so hard to ridicule and dismiss the scenario I have just outlined based on nothing else than those vague (and possibly wrong or incomplete) remarks in the interrogation reports?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #142 on: September 14, 2019, 11:49:39 PM »


Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: The "Domino Room Alibi"
« Reply #143 on: September 15, 2019, 12:47:03 AM »
Although I can't be sure, it could be that Lance Payette's "very seldom" remark concerning Oswald eating lunch in the Domino Room was derived from this testimony provided by TSBD worker Billy Lovelady [at 6 H 337]....

Mr. BALL - Did Oswald ever eat lunch with you?
Mr. LOVELADY - He ate two or three times in that little domino room, but not by himself, with the rest of the boys.


Now, given the fact that Oswald was employed at the Book Depository for a little more than five weeks (27 work days to be exact* [October 16—November 22], not counting any Saturdays [and in his 2002 interview with Gary Mack, Wesley Frazier did say that the warehouse workers would sometimes work on Saturday]), I would say that "two or three times" (out of a possible 27) would, indeed, qualify as "very seldom".

* The above figure of "27 work days" does not include the date of Monday, November 11th, 1963, which was a federal holiday (Veterans Day), and we know that Lee Oswald spent that whole day at Ruth Paine's house in Irving, Texas.

Perry.....your witness. 😁

Maybe you missed .......

Mr. BALL. Did you ever eat lunch with him?
Mr. ARCE. We all eat lunch together in this little domino room. We play dominoes and eat our lunch. He might walk in and lay around with us and he would walk out. He didn't stay in there too long. I guess he didn't like crowds.

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see him when he was eating his lunch?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Where?
Mr. JARMAN - Sometimes in the, as we called it, domino room, and again over coffee table where they make coffee.

Mr. GIVENS. Not before lunch. It would be right at lunch time.
Mr. BELIN. Right at lunch time?
Mr. GIVENS. Yes, sir. We always ate in there.
Mr. BELIN. Would Oswald always eat in there?
Mr. GIVENS. Yes, sir

We also have the statement from Shelley posted by Gary Craig earlier.

If he was basing his "very seldom" remark on Lovelady's comments, why not support his assertion with them? In any event Lovelady's comments are in answer to a question where Oswald ate lunch with him. Seems Lovelady did not eat regularly in the domino room and he was merely relating the number of times he saw Oswald in there.

None of the statements above, from those employees who always ate in the domino room, and therefore best placed to comment, would support the use of "very seldom". I would expect a more considered approach from someone with his background.