A Rock Solid Alibi.....

[Richard Smith]

[
No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

There you go again with another classic meaningless strawman.

It's a strawman to suggest that if Oswald had enough interest in JFK to check out "Profiles in Courage" from the library and read it, that he would have had enough interest to step out of his workplace for a moment to watch him drive by as President of the United States?  Wow.   Once a contrarian, always a contrarian.

[Richard Smith]

And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.

There are many ways an alibi can be established. If, as Walt says, he sees two particular individuals at a specific location and time and it turns out they were indeed there at that time that clearly confirms that Oswald must have been near the location at that time in order to see them.

This is so absurd it requires specific comment.  Here's a simple example.  If I know that Martin and Otto have lunch together on most days at McDonald's and I claim that I saw them there that would not give me an alibi.  It is simply a regular occurrence that anyone could observe.  Just because it might turn out to be true doesn't mean that I was there.  Oswald had worked in the TSBD for weeks.  He would have noticed who had lunch with who and where.  That does not take Nostradamus.  You should be ashamed to peddle such absurd contrarian nonsense.  No one saw Oswald having lunch.  He has no alibi.   He didn't even bring a lunch according to what he told Frazier.

[Alan Ford]

Wrong, unless you think Oswald lied to Frazier about not having a lunch that morning AND carried his sandwich in a bag over two feet long.  LOL.  You think Oswald did this to avoid having lunch with Frazier?  What bad luck for Old Lee.  Not to mention being a completely baseless and bizarre claim.

If Captain Fritz had felt there were serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier, he could have ordered that the suspect's stomach be pumped. Obviously, Captain Fritz felt there were no serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier.

 

Mr. BALL. Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked
like a lunch package that morning?

Mr. FRAZIER. You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn’t take his
lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was
his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.

You raise an interesting question, Mr Smith: why are you and your fellow Warren Gullibles still at an embarrassing loss to explain the dates on this document?



 

[Alan Ford]

It's a strawman to suggest that if Oswald had enough interest in JFK to check out "Profiles in Courage" from the library and read it, that he would have had enough interest to step out of his workplace for a moment to watch him drive by as President of the United States?

But that's exactly what Mr Oswald did do-------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade 

[Richard Smith]

If Captain Fritz had felt there were serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier, he could have ordered that the suspect's stomach be pumped. Obviously, Captain Fritz felt there were no serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier.

 

There were no grounds to believe Oswald had any lunch.  No one other than himself ever claimed it was so.  And the DPD had a mountain of evidence to connect him to the crime.  Again, though, you think Oswald lied to Frazier about his lunch and brought a sandwich in a bag over two feet long?  Like Fred Flinstone's lunch box?  That's really the story you are going with?

[Alan Ford]

Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade.

How many times?

Hosty's sacred note says: "Then went outside to watch P. Parade."
The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE

'The most obvious interpretation' lol

The reason it doesn't say that he saw the parade is because he didn't see it. How can we know that?
When specifically asked the question - did you see the parade - by Inspector Kelley, Oswald answers that no, he did not see the parade.
He did not see the parade.

No one else remembered Mr Oswald making such a statement. Indeed, Agent Bookhout follows Insp. Kelley in giving us Mr Oswald's answer to the two other questions Insp. Kelley put to Mr Oswald in that interrogation, but his report says NOT A WORD about a third question, still less Mr Oswald's answer to it. He knew better than to put any such statement in Mr Oswald's mouth.

As for what led Insp. Kelley to write what he wrote, it's either explained as
a) fabrication on Insp. Kelley's part to incriminate Mr Oswald
b) he asked Mr Oswald 'Did you see Pres. Kennedy get shot?' and Mr Oswald responded 'No I didn't' (as the limousine was out of sight)

How do you account for the fact that not a single officially published interrogation report tells us where exactly Mr Oswald said he was at the time of the shooting? I mean, it's the single most important thing Mr Oswald would have said across all his interrogations. Yet not a peep from anyone about it. They just don't go there.

The explanation for this bizarre omission came in 2019, when Agent Hosty's draft interrogation report for the first interrogation came to light:



The fact that you don't like what it says is neither here nor there

In the corridors of the DPD, when asked his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, Oswald states he was in the building at that time (please don't start with the "on the steps is still in the building" routine, it really looks bad).

Again, 'I, Dan O'Meara, don't like this explanation' is not a substantial rebuttal

Oswald went outside to watch the parade but missed the moment the president passed because he was in the TSBD building having his lunch in the Domino Room. That's where he was when Norman and Jarman entered the through the north/rear door.

He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade

He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

Oswald was not stood on the steps of the TSBD building at the time of the assassination. We have already seen that he stated this to the press. If he was (which he wasn't) there are about a dozen co-workers would were stood behind him (in the lobby), on the steps with him, and who would have passed by him on the steps as they returned to the building. When specifically asked if they had seen Oswald each one said they had not. And it's not a case of silencing these witnesses. As the events of the day unfolded each person who'd seen Oswald on TV would've told family, friends and neighbours, who'd have told more family, friends and relatives. It was such a massive event this sort of news would've spread like wildfire as it's all anyone was talking about.
"They" would never have been able to cover this up.
But they didn't have to cover it up.
Because it didn't happen.

A rather odd argument to be coming from someone who believes, as you do, that numerous employees of the Depository lied about things that went down that day. Now you're suddenly telling us that Messrs Lovelady and Shelley were the soul of honesty? Really, Mr O'Meara?

Besides, if Mr Oswald nipped outside at the last minute to watch the P. Parade, he (being a nobody at that time) was in all likelihood noticed by few of the others on those steps.

And the ridiculous magic shadow down Mr Lovelady, which neither I nor you nor anyone else can explain as a natural shadow, strongly suggests that he was noticed by the 'investigating' authorities who first checked out the Wiegman film:

It therefore follows as a distinct possibility that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi[/b][/i]

Oswald on the steps would never have seen Norman and Jarman entering the rear of the TSBD. He would've had no idea they did this. It is further evidence Oswald was not on the steps. As if any were needed.

He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade

 

[Richard Smith]

But that's exactly what Mr Oswald did do-------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade 

Honestly, that is tin foil hat stuff.  It ranks with Walt's red rings.  There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.  And you think the conspirators would exercise no control over their "patsy" who they were framing for the crime?  They just let him stand on the street in the presence of his co-workers, law enforcement. and random witnesses.  Hoping they can get all these folks to lie after the fact?  That was their plan?  Unreal.

[Alan Ford]

There were no grounds to believe Oswald had any lunch.  No one other than himself ever claimed it was so.  And the DPD had a mountain of evidence to connect him to the crime.  Again, though, you think Oswald lied to Frazier about his lunch and brought a sandwich in a bag over two feet long?  Like Fred Flinstone's lunch box?  That's really the story you are going with?

Let me know when you have an actual argument, Mr Smith!