Oswald: No power lunch

[Dan O'meara]

~Grin~ Keep telling yourself that, Mr O'Meara, and don't prey on the fact that your contorted reading of the Hosty draft report has been torn to shreds in the foregoing few posts 

Happy to!

Officer Baker runs up the steps on the less crowded west side and asks for directions to the stairs

"Officer Baker runs up the steps on the less crowded west side and asks for directions to the stairs"

So you think the completely innocuous encounter you describe here was converted into Baker's gun-toting confrontation with Oswald that Truly had to break up and then it was relocated to the 2nd floor lunchroom??
Get a grip man.

[Dan O'meara]

You're still smarting from the ignominious whupping you received over the Hosty report, Mr O'Meara. I'll give you a day to calm down! 

 
I think your unicorn needs watering 

[Alan Ford]

This is daft. So you're basically saying that they were worried about the possibility of visual proof or witnesses emerging which could prove Oswald was out front at the time of the shooting?
Rather than just concern about Baker and Truly being exposed as perjurers, what would it have meant on the grand overall scale of things if such evidence had emerged? Would they have just dismissed the whole Oswald as the shootist theory and said "Oh, well it was plausible that he was in the 2nd floor lunchroom so it at least it means Baker and Truly won't get charged for perjury"?

Ah, but they had to persuade Officer Baker to sign up to the lie. Without that the lie collapses. The evidence is it took him a long time to come on board. His same-day affidavit is an honest account of what went down

If they'd gone to all the trouble of setting Oswald up as a patsy then surely making sure that visual evidence or human witnesses claiming he was elsewhere at the exact time of the shooting would have been taken care of?

This was not Stalin's Russia--------------every chance something might emerge into the public domain that could not be caught in time and controlled

But surely there's no significant time difference between someone who has gone upstairs, got a Coke and stood around in the lunchroom before being seen and someone who has gone upstairs, got a Coke and then started to make his way back downstairs again. In both versions the same man is still basically on the 2nd floor just in different locations.

It adds crucial time for the Coke to be bought from the machine. Remember, Officer Baker and Mr Truly have rushed into the building and are rushing up the first flight of stairs. They find Oswald on the stairway with a Coke in his hand. That's hardly suggestive of a fleeing assassin, is it?

Another thing that doesn't make sense about this theory; what was Truly's role in all this and why would he have been so eager to go along with the story of Oswald being in the 2nd floor lunchroom if it was completely fabricated? What was in it for him?

We don't know, but his clearing as an 'employee' of a man who was caught walking away from the rear stairway several floors up just after the shooting raises every suspicion that he was up to his eyeballs in this thing.

If he could so easily have been forced to lie then surely anyone claiming they saw Oswald outside could have been made to lie also...or maybe they were?

I believe Officer Baker was forced to lie. I doubt much pressure needed to be exerted on Mr Truly

[Alan Ford]

"Officer Baker runs up the steps on the less crowded west side and asks for directions to the stairs"

So you think the completely innocuous encounter you describe here was converted into Baker's gun-toting confrontation with Oswald that Truly had to break up and then it was relocated to the 2nd floor lunchroom??

It's because it was innocuous, and because it proved Mr Oswald was not the shooter, that it had to be thus converted.

Get a grip man.

Let me know when you have a substantive rebuttal to offer, Mr O'Meara. Perhaps take some time to calm down first and nurse your bruises! 

[Alan Ford]

I think your unicorn needs watering 

Again, let us know when you feel ready to offer meaningful rebuttal. Right now you're just making a fool of yourself 

[Vincent Baxter]

Ah, but they had to persuade Officer Baker to sign up to the lie. Without that the lie collapses. The evidence is it took him a long time to come on board. His same-day affidavit is an honest account of what went down

The sheer panic and chaos of that day could so easily have caused confusion and could easily have explained any inconsistencies in Officer Baker's same-day affidavit though. Surely a little "Now I've had time to calm down and think properly, I've realised what I've said might have been wrong..." would be more plausible than creating an entire false story?

This was not Stalin's Russia--------------every chance something might emerge into the public domain that could not be caught in time and controlled

But my point was what would have happened to whole Oswald was the lone shooter plan if such evidence proving he was outside at the time of the shooting did emerge? It's all very well saying they needed to cover their tracks in this situation and say they saw him somewhere where he could easily have gotten to after the shooting, but the entire plan of framing Oswald would have been made redundant if such evidence came to light. The fact that Baker and Truly would have been exposed as telling porkies would have been the least of their worries. It would have put an end to all the work that had gone into framing Oswald.

It adds crucial time for the Coke to be bought from the machine. Remember, Officer Baker and Mr Truly have rushed into the building and are rushing up the first flight of stairs. They find Oswald on the stairway with a Coke in his hand. That's hardly suggestive of a fleeing assassin, is it?

Surely we're only talking about seconds though. I can't imagine it raising any more doubts or fuel for CTers than the already existing explanation that he made it down from the sixth floor and apparently appeared not out of breath in the slightest. And they could have just ignored the bit about him having a Coke if need be, it was a totally made up story after all.

We don't know, but his clearing as an 'employee' of a man who was caught walking away from the rear stairway several floors up just after the shooting raises every suspicion that he was up to his eyeballs in this thing.

I believe Officer Baker was forced to lie. I doubt much pressure needed to be exerted on Mr Truly

Was there also a female employee who witnessed Oswald on the 2nd floor after the shooting, or am I getting totally mixed up with some thing else? I may be wrong on this and don't have the means to check up on it at this exact moment

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Adams & Styles, who had been looking out of a 4th floor window, with Elsie Dorman & Dorothy Garner, ran down the TSBD stairway about 10 sec after Oswald, & they exited the first floor into the Houston loading dock at 80 sec at about the same time as  Baker & Truly entered via the front Elm St door.

This alone destroys your theory. There is no way that Baker and Truly needed 80 seconds to enter the building at the front entrance.

Here Baker says he took 90 sec to 120 sec, & that tests showed 90 sec.

[Jack Nessan]

No, Ms Adams brings them up in her testimony

Translated: you have zero ability to neutralize the issue raised by Ms Adams' mention of Mr Molina and Ms Davis.

Ms Adams saw both Mr Molina and Ms Davis in front of the building. If you were familiar with Mr Molina and Ms Davis' accounts of their actions post-shooting, you would know that Ms Adams' mention of them blows your silly 'She left the 4th floor at 12:35' timeline out of the water.

 

Typical, just make things up. You brought them up you explain them.

 You were asked to explain. Obviously you can't. Davis and Molina prove she left later than she thought. All time stamps indicate she left at approximately 12:35.