The Bus Stop Farce

[Richard Smith]

Yes, it is laughable.  Only if a CTer went back in a time machine with a stop watch could they come up with that level of specificity of events down to the minute.  The fact remains that several people put Oswald at the scene of the Tippit murder.  If he was there, then the timing issue is not relevant.   

Pathetic. When witness testimony is not to a LN's liking, the witnesses are unreliable. When circumstantial evidence does not support the LN's case, the witnesses suddenly become reliable, except of course for those who say something that does not fit the narrative.

But thanks for proving the point I made earlier;

However he got there, he was there.  That's all that matters.

It's all that matters in your mixed up world, that's for sure, but in the real world, when there is evidence that a suspect could not physically have been at a particular place, at a particular time, to commit the crime, there is no opportunity to commit the murder, regardless of what witnesses say and believe they saw.

CTers want to go down various rabbit holes with baseless claims like "add on two minutes for a short conversation with Tippit." And bus departure times as though those couldn't vary and are accurate down to the minute.

More idiocy. We know that Tippit's killer talked to the officer after being called over. The man walking towards the passenger door of the car, talking to Tippit and the latter getting out of the car and walk to the front all takes time. Two minutes is a fair assumption, but even if it only took one, it still doesn't matter for the timeline.

The departure times for the bus did probably vary, which is why the FBI found that the schedule said the bus stopped at Jefferson at 1.12. and 1.22. Markham estimated she took the bus at 1.15. That could be either a delayed 1.12 bus of simply the 1.22 bus. It is of no relevance which bus it was. What is relevant is that Markham could not witness a shooting at 10th street at 1.14 or 1.15 when in fact she would already have been at the bus stop. If that's too much logic for you, I'm sorry, I can't fix stupid!

Btw I saw you complaining about applied logic in the matter of the bus stop, but what I did not see was an explanation for Markham allegedly still being at 10th street at 1.14 / 1.15 when she herself said she took her daily bus on Jefferson at 1.15. You don't even try to explain it for an obvious reason; you can't!

But then dismiss anything they do not like as the product of "speculation."  LOL.

Like what? Give one example.... I bet you can't.

There is zero doubt that Oswald murdered Tippit. 

Than prove it..... I bet you can't. But then, for everything you believe there is zero doubt in your mind. Just like Trump winning the election LOL

A great insight into the CTer "mind."  The inability to process information in a logical manner.  Here we have Roger making all manner of baseless assumptions trying to pin Oswald's movements down in pedantic detail to the minute.  For what purpose?  Apparently to prove he could not be at the Tippit scene at the time of the murder.  But wait.  Multiple eyewitnesses confirm he was there.  And he is arrested a short distance away with a pistol and the same two brands of ammo used at the Tippit scene.  What are the odds?  But Roger is stuck on bus schedules and over nonsense that prove absolutely nothing even if accurate.  Why? Because Oswald was there as confirmed by multiple witnesses and the evidence.  If a thing happens, the odds against it happening are no longer relevant in proving that it didn't happen.  That's rabbit hole lunacy.  It's like trying to convince someone who is holding the winning lottery ticket in their hand that they couldn't have won because the odds are so long against it happening.

[Richard Smith]

The departure times for the bus did probably vary, which is why the FBI found that the schedule said the bus stopped at Jefferson at 1.12. and 1.22. Markham estimated she took the bus at 1.15. That could be either a delayed 1.12 bus of simply the 1.22 bus. It is of no relevance which bus it was. What is relevant is that Markham could not witness a shooting at 10th street at 1.14 or 1.15 when in fact she would already have been at the bus stop.

Buses run on a tight schedule....  If the route timetable says that a bus will be at a certain location ( Jefferson and Patton) at a posted time then the bus will be there at that time.   However, occasionally a bus will be delayed by traffic and arrive at the bus stop a bit late....( but NEVER will a bus be early)

Astounding.

[Martin Weidmann]

A great insight into the CTer "mind."  The inability to process information in a logical manner.  Here we have Roger making all manner of baseless assumptions trying to pin Oswald's movements down in pedantic detail to the minute.  For what purpose?  Apparently to prove he could not be at the Tippit scene at the time of the murder.  But wait.  Multiple eyewitnesses confirm he was there.  And he is arrested a short distance away with a pistol and the same two brands of ammo used at the Tippit scene.  What are the odds?  But Roger is stuck on bus schedules and over nonsense that prove absolutely nothing even if accurate.  Why? Because Oswald was there as confirmed by multiple witnesses and the evidence.  If a thing happens, the odds against it happening are no longer relevant in proving that it didn't happen.  That's rabbit hole lunacy.  It's like trying to convince someone who is holding the winning lottery ticket in their hand that they couldn't have won because the odds are so long against it happening.

So you can't explain how Markham could still be at 10th street to watch a murder at 1.14 or 1.15 when she said herself that she took her daily bus on Jefferson at that exact time? Got it!

Apparently to prove he could not be at the Tippit scene at the time of the murder.  But wait.  Multiple eyewitnesses confirm he was there. 

Hey idiot, I have four witnesses who saw you beating your wife in a hotel in Miami yesterday. No point to deny it because those people saw you there, so you were there, right?

And he is arrested a short distance away with a pistol and the same two brands of ammo used at the Tippit scene.

What pistol would that be? The one that suddenly showed up in the police station, some two hours after Oswald's arrest and was initialed by police officers who were not even present at the arrest? Is that the pistol you mean?

If a thing happens, the odds against it happening are no longer relevant in proving that it didn't happen.

Hilarious... So, you were beating your wife in Miami yesterday? Four witnesses said it happened......

It's like trying to convince someone who is holding the winning lottery ticket in their hand that they couldn't have won because the odds are so long against it happening.

Like Trump is trying to do with the election? Is that what you mean?

[Bill Chapman]

Poor dumb cop

[Ross Lidell]

So you can't explain how Markham could still be at 10th street to watch a murder at 1.14 or 1.15 when she said herself that she took her daily bus on Jefferson at that exact time? Got it!

Apparently to prove he could not be at the Tippit scene at the time of the murder.  But wait.  Multiple eyewitnesses confirm he was there. 

Hey idiot, I have four witnesses who saw you beating your wife in a hotel in Miami yesterday. No point to deny it because those people saw you there, so you were there, right?

And he is arrested a short distance away with a pistol and the same two brands of ammo used at the Tippit scene.

What pistol would that be? The one that suddenly showed up in the police station, some two hours after Oswald's arrest and was initialed by police officers who were not even present at the arrest? Is that the pistol you mean?

If a thing happens, the odds against it happening are no longer relevant in proving that it didn't happen.

Hilarious... So, you were beating your wife in Miami yesterday? Four witnesses said it happened......

It's like trying to convince someone who is holding the winning lottery ticket in their hand that they couldn't have won because the odds are so long against it happening.

Like Trump is trying to do with the election? Is that what you mean?

All those replies are I M M A T E R I A L

[Martin Weidmann]

All those replies are I M M A T E R I A L

Not as immaterial as your comment

[Ross Lidell]

Not as immaterial as your comment

A weak reply.

A strong reply would explain how your comments were "NOT immaterial". In other words: material.