Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Fifty Six Years Later, and Still The Oswald Apologists Have No Conspiracy Proof  (Read 1425 times)

Online Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3421
Why did Jerry Ford move an entry wound location?

 ???

Ford moved the entry wound location?

From 14cm x 14cm
... to or from where exactly?
Measurements, please.

Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
Why is it assumed the burden of proof is on those unaccepting of official explanations and supporting "evidence"? Why does it not suffice of those who react with, "we're not buying this," to present the flaws indicating the DPD Chief seemed not to understand what happened or when, and considering this is a well supported description of Chief Curry, how could a "Presidential panel," in DC know for any certainty, what happened or when?

You're laying the burden of proof of conspiracy on us? Is it because you prefer authority, out of expectation of "order" and a sense of security, vs doubt bred chaos, uncertainty? Authority inoculates itself from actual accountability. Accountability, considering the evidence accumulated in these THREE murders, requires all of the "i's" dotted and the "t's" crossed, if for no other reasons than one of the victims being the POTUS and the DPD "had their man," but "lost him" inside their own shop!

Was DPD Chief Jesse Curry subjected to similar "official treatment," as the American public, the "mushroom" treatment, "kept in the dark and fed fertilizer," or was Chief Curry cultivating the mushrooms? We are the way we are, influenced by examples like these, from pages of a book authored by Jesse Curry.

The DPD "informed" the public that it had determined Oswald to have shot President Kennedy and DPD officer Tippit.:

The page number of Curry's book is visible.:


VS


Quote
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/robertse.htm
.....Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what time it was approximately that Oswald came in?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Now, it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say because
Mr. BALL.. How long did he stay in the room ?
Mr. ROBERTS. Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.
Mr. BALL. You recall he went out zipping it-was he running or walking?
Mrs. ROBERTS. He was walking fast-he was making tracks pretty fast....

Quote
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm
...Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I would hire her back.
Mr. BALL. there some reason why you let her go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, she would just get to being disagreeable with renters and I don't know, she has a lot of handicaps. She has an overweight problem and she has some habits that some people have to understand to tolerate.

298

Mr. BALL. What are they?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Talking just sitting down and making up tales, you know, have you ever seen people like that? Just have a creative mind, there's nothing to it, and just make up and keep talking until she just makes a lie out of it. Listen, I'm telling you the truth and this isn't to go any further, understand that? You have to know these things because you are going to question this lady. I will tell you, she's just as intelligent--I think she is a person that doesn't mean to do that but she just does it automatically. It seems as though that she, oh, I don't know, wants to be attractive or something at times. I just don't know; I don't understand it myself. I only wish I did.
Mr. BALL. She was working for you in October and November while Oswald was a renter with you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was. This Saturday night will be 3 weeks she left.
Mr. BALL. She quit 3 weeks ago?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I didn't know she was going.
Mr. BALL. Where did she go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I do not know. I called her sister to try to find out. I don't think she knows.
Mr. BALL. Who is her sister?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Mrs. Bertha Cheek.
Mr. BALL She lives here in Dallas?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; on Swiss, I think....
Quote
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/cheek.htm
...Mr. GRIFFIN. When did the police officer whose name might have been Olson, when did he rent from you?
Mrs. CHEEK. Beachcomber in 1961 or 1960, I believe.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How long did he continue to rent from you?
Mrs. CHEEK. I don't think he rented there very long, 3 or 4 months. But this was after. Let's see, no, it wasn't after. That was after the first time I had met him.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, other than Mr. Olson, you don't know of anybody else of your acquaintances or tenants who knew Jack Ruby?
Mrs. CHEEK. No. You know, his name has been in the paper and his advertising; and I am sure a lot of people had heard about him and go to the club, but I had never gone to the club.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Now did your husband know Jack Ruby? Mr. Cheek, did he know Jack Ruby?
Mrs. CHEEK. No. I don't know whether he did or not. He may know Jack Ruby because he is a National Cash Register man downtown that fixes all of the cash registers. He might have gone up and worked on a cash register. I really don't know. I haven't asked him.....
....Mrs. CHEEK. The man went through those records at the house. I let them go all through whatever they wanted to when they came out.
Mr. GRIFFIN. The Federal Bureau of Investigation?
Mrs. CHEEK. Yes. And I told them what connection I had in connection with Jack Ruby. He asked me to put $6,000 in a nightclub.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am wondering if I could ask you if you will make those records available again? I think what I would like to do is ask one of the Secret Service agents to go out there and either make some arrangements to photocopy them and then return them to you, or else if it would be more convenient to let me look at them for some short period of time, and then return them to you. I think I would prefer to photocopy them, unless they are voluminous and it would be prohibitive. I think I would only be going back to January 1959.
Mrs. CHEEK. Those two men went through everything I had and looked at it.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Would you object if I----
Mrs. CHEEK. It is just an awful lot of trouble for me right now because I am very busy and I have illness in my home. If I thought I could help you, and really if there is anything there, I would bring them down myself to you.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I would like to do this in a way that would be least inconvenient.
Mrs. CHEEK. But I don't know Oswald and I just knew Jack Ruby when he asked me to invest $6,000 and I didn't do it. I didn't like the way he wanted me to invest. He wanted to put in $1,000, and me $6,000.
Mr. GRIFFIN. What would be the least inconvenient way to do this? If perhaps all the books are in one place, we could get the books from January 1, 1959, on to the present and photocopy them in a day and then return them to you. Would that be convenient?
Mrs. CHEEK. I have them stored, is the only thing. I have a lot of things in front, and it is difficult in digging it out, you know.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I suppose really--is there going to be anytime in the next week or so that would be more convenient for you than any other time?
Mrs. CHEEK. I really don't know of anything else. My daughter has cancer. She may be well and she may not be, I don't know.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Let me ask you this. Would you retain these records, and sometime during the next month, let me ask one of the agents to contact you again in connection with getting copies of them for us, and you could work out at that time what would be most convenient to you. If you don't like it that way, then suggest it some other way, because I want to do this some way that would be least inconvenient to you.
Mrs. CHEEK. Well, you are welcome to come to see them again as far as that is concerned, but I don't want to let them go out of my hands. I am not going to let them go from me, because if some of those things are missing, it is my fault. The men can come out there any time and look them over if they want to look them over and take pictures or whatever they may want to do, or copy them all off. They can come out there and just copy every name that I have ever had or ever rented to from the time of 1947, if they would like.
Mr. GRIFFIN. If this were done at your home, that would be the best so far as you are concerned?
Mrs. CHEEK. Yes; I will have to go get them. I never have moved them from Swiss Avenue, and they are in the storage house. I will have to go over and get them and bring them over to Hillcrest.
Mr. GRIFFIN. How many different boxes are we talking about?
Mrs. CHEEK. Everything I have ever owned, I guess is what I was going to give you. That is what I did before. Every record I have, every name that I ever rented to, I give it to the men that was out there and you may have them now.
Mr. GRIFFIN. I am sure we don't want to go back that far. Well, let me see what we can work out, with the Secret Service or the Bureau, and then I will either contact you myself about it or I will ask someone of the agents to

385

do it, and I think it could be done fairly simply. I know in the past that photographers can set the camera on a kitchen table and run these things through. I take it then when Jack Ruby contacted you in connection with buying out a part of the Carousel Club, that he got your name from somebody?....
......Mr. GRIFFIN. Now I will ask you this, too. Do you have any information that you consider to be of any importance in connection with what this Commission is doing, that you haven't provided us so far?
Mrs. CHEEK. I don't think I have any information at all that I could give you. If I had, I had already called someone and told you about it. If I had ever talked to anyone or anyone mentioned anything about this, I just, like my sister, if she got a letter through the mail, I said, "You call the FBI immediately and turn it in." "Turn everything in."
She would get letters through the mail from different people and the people would be coming out interviewing, and I said, "Call immediately and tell them,"
Mr. GRIFFIN. If anything comes to your attention----
Mrs. CHEEK. I will call you and tell you, surely. I will try to be as helpful as I can be, because I don't understand it, like everyone else.
Mr. GRIFFIN. We certainly appreciate that, and we are trying to get as much as we can.
Mrs. CHEEK. I can't feature Ruby killing Oswald, and I can't feature the President being killed.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Well, you are not the only one.
Mrs. CHEEK. It shocked me.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Again, I want to thank you for coming down here. It has been a pleasure to meet you......

https://jfkfacts.org/dallas-police-chief-jesse-curry-on-the-origin-of-the-shots/#comment-859206
Tom S. February 23, 2016 at 6:52 am
Curry, November 6, 1969:




http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/Curry%20Jesse%20Chief%20Dallas%20Police%20Department/Item%2005.pdf


Steve, "enough said." The choice of wording of your thread's title reflects badly, considering the well supported examples above, but not on who you assume.
If you are old enough to have lived the experience and witnessed parts of it via live TV, it must have left a markedly different impression on you than it has left on me. President Kennedy had come through my town in an open car, thirteen months before, passing ten yards from my curbside perch. I thought he, his wife, and the American public deserved better, personal security and murder investigation wise, after he was suddenly shot down, and much more so, after his brother received the same.

Back then, at junior high school development level, this apt description was not yet a "knee jerk" component of my vocabulary.:
Quote
clus·ter·f***
/ˈkləstərˌfək/
Learn to pronounce
noun VULGAR SLANG•US
a disastrously mishandled situation or undertaking.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 10:39:38 AM by Tom Scully »

Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
Why is it assumed the burden of proof is on those unaccepting of official explanations and supporting "evidence"? Why does it not suffice of those who react with, "we're not buying this," to present the flaws indicating the DPD Chief seemed not to understand what happened or when, and considering this is a well supported description of Chief Curry, how could a "Presidential panel," in DC know for any certainty, what happened or when?

You're laying the burden of proof of conspiracy on us? Is it because you prefer authority, out of expectation of "order" and a sense of security, vs doubt bred chaos, uncertainty? Authority inoculates itself from actual accountability. Accountability, considering the evidence accumulated in these THREE murders, requires all of the "i's" dotted and the "t's" crossed, if for no other reasons than one of the victims being the POTUS and the DPD "had their man," but "lost him" inside their own shop!

Was DPD Chief Jesse Curry subjected to similar "official treatment," as the American public, the "mushroom" treatment, "kept in the dark and fed fertilizer," or was Chief Curry cultivating the mushrooms? We are the way we are, influenced by examples like these, from pages of a book authored by Jesse Curry.

The DPD "informed" the public that it had determined Oswald to have shot President Kennedy and DPD officer Tippit.:

The page number of Curry's book is visible.:


VS



https://jfkfacts.org/dallas-police-chief-jesse-curry-on-the-origin-of-the-shots/#comment-859206
Tom S. February 23, 2016 at 6:52 am
Curry, November 6, 1969:




http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/Curry%20Jesse%20Chief%20Dallas%20Police%20Department/Item%2005.pdf


Steve, "enough said." The choice of wording of your thread's title reflects badly, considering the well supported examples above, but not on who you assume.
If you are old enough to have lived the experience and witnessed parts of it via live TV, it must have left a markedly different impression on you than it has left on me. President Kennedy had come through my town in an open car, thirteen months before, passing ten yards from my curbside perch. I thought he, his wife, and the American public deserved better, personal security and murder investigation wise, after he was suddenly shot down, and much more so, after his brother received the same.

Back then, at junior high school development level, this apt description was not yet a "knee jerk" component of my vocabulary.:

"Clusterf**k", indeed, Tom.  Have you a thesaurus, or just go to 'urban dictionary' for more...... relevant terms? .....  thank you again for your time and consideration, sir.  Stars in your Crown+

 

Mobile View