Et tu, Bonnie?


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

Author Topic: Et tu, Bonnie?  (Read 25402 times)

Offline Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2282
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2021, 09:17:21 PM »
It's not hard to figure out, Dick. There are numerous incidents where witnesses were coerced behind closed doors to change their statements so it dovetailed nicely with the running narrative. It doesn't mean that these people here were "conspirators." You should know better than this, but then I guess this is your way of offering a rebuttal to what Alan is saying here.

I get the impression that Richard's rebuttal consists of pointing out that anyone can open the door to the roof.
Are we supposed to believe Truly and Baker couldn't operate the latch?
Isn't it possible Truly put the latch back on after coming back through the roof door?
Am I missing something?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2021, 09:17:21 PM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3667
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2021, 12:46:56 AM »
It's not hard to figure out, Dick. There are numerous incidents where witnesses were coerced behind closed doors to change their statements so it dovetailed nicely with the running narrative. It doesn't mean that these people here were "conspirators." You should know better than this, but then I guess this is your way of offering a rebuttal to what Alan is saying here.

It apparently is hard for you to figure out.  Alan stupidly suggested Truly and Baker lied about going to the roof.  And his evidence for this is that they couldn't flip the latch.  Obviously, they could unlock the latch and go to the roof.  And then latch it back after they came down.  To suggest Truly and Baker lied about this for some unknown reason is laughable.

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1858
  • Beware of Geeks bearing gifs.
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2021, 01:17:53 AM »
The eventual "story" that evolved with many key witnesses (but not all) was developed by Belin and Ball in their March 64 visit to Dallas. This included the troubling conflicting statements of Williams, Jarman and Norman. They
developed the sequence of events that would play out for the various testimonies. Some problematic witnesses like Dougherty could never be resolved (ref Eisenberg memo). These guys all testified just days after the "re-enactments" were decided upon, four months after the real events. Many original statements vary considerably from the final versions.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2021, 01:17:53 AM »


Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2021, 01:35:37 AM »
Yes, Oswald was totally innocent. The reason he left work shortly after the assassination and went to him rooming house was because he wanted to retrieve his revolver and hunt down the dirty bastards who killed JFK. He even carried extra bullets in case there were more than a couple of assassins. Heck, maybe a whole bunch of 'em.

And like OJ Simpson looking for the killers on golf courses across America, Oswald knew that they were somewhere on the streets of Dallas.

But first, he wanted to see a movie.

And the rest is, as they say, history.

« Last Edit: March 31, 2021, 04:04:28 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5888
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2021, 01:46:42 AM »
Yes, Oswald was totally innocent. The reason he left work shortly after the assassination and went to him rooming house was because he wanted to retrieve his revolver and hunt down the dirty bastards who killed JFK. He even carried extra bullets in case there were more than a couple of assassins. Heck, maybe a whole bunch of 'em.

And like OJ Simpson looking for the killers on golf courses across America, Oswald knew that they were somewhere on the streets of Dallas.

But first, he wanted to see a movie.

And the rest is, as they say, is history.

The reason he left work shortly after the assassination

There are at least three different accounts of him leaving....

So, how do you know when he actually left the TSBD?


Offline Joffrey van de Wiel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2021, 01:56:27 AM »
The reason he left work shortly after the assassination

There are at least three different accounts of him leaving....

So, how do you know when he actually left the TSBD?

Oswald left at 12:33 p.m. according to the Report, unobserved by anyone. He became a suspect because he was supposedly the only one who left the TSBD without checking with law enforcement first. In reality, about 18 individuals did the same without becoming suspects.

Deputy Roger Craig saw Oswald get into a car with a Black or Latin at the wheel and drive off. What's the third version Martin?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2021, 01:56:27 AM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3667
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2021, 02:32:54 AM »
The eventual "story" that evolved with many key witnesses (but not all) was developed by Belin and Ball in their March 64 visit to Dallas. This included the troubling conflicting statements of Williams, Jarman and Norman. They
developed the sequence of events that would play out for the various testimonies. Some problematic witnesses like Dougherty could never be resolved (ref Eisenberg memo). These guys all testified just days after the "re-enactments" were decided upon, four months after the real events. Many original statements vary considerably from the final versions.

Nothing "evolved" if by that you mean there was a frame up of Oswald.  A few details may have been left out or omitted from the initial statements as expected.  Over time there was a more in depth investigation.  When all was said and done Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor.  Fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the SN window.  He fled the scene and murdered a police officer.   It's a stone cold case against Oswald.  To suggest that a latch on a door to the roof precludes Baker and Truly from going there after the assassination is somehow evidence of a conspiracy is laughable.

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1858
  • Beware of Geeks bearing gifs.
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2021, 02:55:49 AM »
Nothing "evolved" if by that you mean there was a frame up of Oswald.  A few details may have been left out or omitted from the initial statements as expected.  Over time there was a more in depth investigation.  When all was said and done Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor.  Fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the SN window.  He fled the scene and murdered a police officer.   It's a stone cold case against Oswald.  To suggest that a latch on a door to the roof precludes Baker and Truly from going there after the assassination is somehow evidence of a conspiracy is laughable.

Oswald was dead within three days of the crime. As I said Ball and Belin spent time in Dallas in March 64 trying to sort out the reconstruction of Oswald's movements with the underlying presumption that he was the assassin. They did reconstructions of the staircase and lunchroom encounter, shell casings dropping etc. but not all witnesses and events were used. Inconvenient events were omitted, particularly those of Dougherty, Adams, Lovelady and Shelley.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2021, 02:55:49 AM »


 

Mobile View