Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !  (Read 10851 times)

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 697
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2018, 03:13:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So the man who actually brought the rifles into the TSBD two days before, Warren Caster, never crossed his mind according to you. Sure, that makes sense. NOT!

The official narrative is ridiculous. This issue clearly shows the conspiracy in action.

So Truly was supposed to be suspicious of a guy who wasn't even there that day?  It's the "two days before" part that you should reflect upon before embarrassing yourself with nonsense like this.  At over fifty years and counting there is zero credible evidence that links either Truly or Caster to this event.  You, who otherwise pretends to be concerned with the legal rights of guilty parties such as Oswald, should be particularly ashamed to cast false accusations against folks for whom there is no evidence to link them to this crime. 
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 03:25:53 PM by Richard Smith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2018, 03:13:13 PM »

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 697
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2018, 03:37:22 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And he didn't see Oswald on the 2nd floor "just seconds" after the shooting.

Ah.. another word game. OK, I'll bite... what would be "just seconds" to you? The point I made, which went completely over your head, is that Truly had seen Oswald on the 2nd floor just after the shooting (regardless of how many seconds it was), standing there calm and collective.

Joe Elliott made the pathetic claim that it was natural for Truly to think of Oswald, as soon as he found out that the shots were fired from his building, when in fact there was nothing natural about it. Truly had just vouched for Oswald. No rational thought process would make him select Oswald as the "natural" choice. 


But here you imply that Truly was acting in some inexplicable manner to point the finger at Oswald in the immediate aftermath of the assassination.

Oh boy, don't you ever get tired of making stuff up?

Let's me get this one straight.  By questioning Truly's motives in pointing out that Oswald was missing, you are not implying that Truly was involved in any conspiracy or frame up in the assassination?  It's hard to square with a statement like "No rational thought process would make him select Oswald as the "natural" choice."  That clearly implies that you are suggesting that Truly did so for some sinister reason.  Why do you think he did this if you are not suggesting it has anything to do with his involvement in a conspiracy to frame Oswald?  Once again you appear to be trying to have your cake and eat it too.  You imply something, but then refuse to own it because of the obvious absurdity and inability to provide any proof.  Maybe if you explained to us why you think Truly pointed out Oswald was missing despite "no rational thought process" for doing so maybe that would clear up your position on the matter.

Offline Jack Nessan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 175
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2018, 02:49:10 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not quite - The WC had asked the FBI to do a thorough check on his "background" after he gave his WC testimony.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The WC became "concerned" because he saw an unarmed "elderly Negro" in the SE window ("SN" window) of the 6th floor from 12.15 pm - 12.25 pm. Because he didn't disclose this observation to his wife, they didn't believe him. Rowland (who found out where the shots had been fired from the day after) had mentioned the Negro gentleman to the FBI officers on the Saturday, but according to Rowland they were "not interested". They were interested in whether he could ID the gunman - he could not. He was interviewed SEVEN times by the FBI.

The WC DID believe his observation of a white male gunman at the SW end of the 6th floor at 12.15 pm because he had disclosed this information to his wife.

However, 10 minutes or so post shots, he mentioned observing TWO people on the 6th floor - one an armed white male to Officer Craig.

Several other witnesses had also seen TWO people on the 6th floor.

The presence of an additional person on the 6th floor could possibly mean an accomplice or co-conspirator. This didn't bode well for a "LN scenario".

Since Arnold mentioned an "elderly Negro" they (FBI) took him to his word and the FBI looked at Piper and West, neither of which had a red/green shirt that day or were on the 6th floor.

Problem was - Arnold was at some distance from the TSBD and he could not have possibly accurately
"guessed" the age of the Negro gentleman.

What the WC did know and didn't disclose to Rowland was that there was a tall, thin, short haired Negro gentleman who wore a green Khaki shirt and was on the 6th floor after 12 noon and admitted to leaving the floor when he heard both Norman and Jarman arrive onto the 5th floor (12.25 pm onward). He was Bonnie Ray Williams (BRW).

Instead of doing the obvious and challenging BRW with the observation of Rowland or showing a photo of BRW to Rowland - the WC set out to use the FBI to discredit him instead.

Mr David Belin also used Arnold's wife to "character assassinate" him as well.


The only person assassinating Rowland's character was Rowland. Apparently you feel it is appropriate to choose the parts of his statement that are truthful and ignore the obvious descrepancies. He contradicts himself in his own statement and claims everyone that records his statement from the FBI to the Dallas Sheriff Dept didn't record it properly.


Your original post concerned Rowland seeing a man with a ?30-odd six? rifle. There is no such thing as a ?30 odd six?, Arnold made that up. Secondly, you cannot tell the caliber of a rifle from 100 feet away, Arnold fabricated that too. The only way to know is read what it says on the barrel, everything else would be a guess. Additionally JFK was killed with 6.5mm caliber bullets not a ?30 odd six.? This is just one of many parts of his statement that are easily seen to be fabricated. A few of the fabrications were volunteered by Rowland without anyone even asking him a question.
Rowland was caught fabricating numerous parts of his statement, incredibly he could not even give the same answer twice to the question did he look back at the window after he heard the shot. Giving different answers to the same question is the cornerstone of his statement.


Arnold Rowland could not answer a simple question. The yes, maybe, no answer to: "did you look at the building after the shot?" question.

YES ANSWER:
 Representative FORD - You never again, after the motorcade once came into your view, looked back at the School Depository Building?
Mr. ROWLAND - I did after the shots were fired.

MAYBE ANSWER:

Mr. SPECTER - Did you have any impression or reaction as to the point of origin when you heard the first noise?
Mr. ROWLAND - Well, I began looking, I didn't look at the building mainly, and as practically any of' the police officers that were there then will tell you, the echo effect was such that it sounded like it came from the railroad yards. That is where I looked, that is where all the policemen, everyone, converged on the railroads.

NO ANSWER:

Mr. SPECTER - After the shots occurred, did you ever look back at the Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; I did not. In fact, I went over toward the scene of the railroad yards myself.




The answer to Ford?s question about returning to Dealey Plaza explains Arnold?s ever changing story.


The CHAIRMAN - Anything further, Congressman Ford?
Representative FORD - Mr. Rowland, have you ever had occasion to go back to the scene and reconstruct it? Have you ever gone back--
The CHAIRMAN - Supposing we take a few minutes recess.
Mr. ROWLAND - The answer to that question is yes; I do all the time. I pass that area very frequently.

Rowland reconstructed the assassination in his mind until he finally convinces himself there was another person.





Rowland fabricated numerous parts of his testimony, an additional person in the SN was just one of them.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2018, 02:49:10 PM »

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 1320
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2018, 04:04:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Your original post concerned Rowland seeing a man with a ?30-odd six? rifle. There is no such thing as a ?30 odd six?, Arnold made that up.

The proper pronunciation is thirty-aught-six. However, where I come from, it is commonly pronounced as thirty-odd six.  Arnold never made that one up.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 5075
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2018, 06:06:54 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Secondly, you cannot tell the caliber of a rifle from 100 feet away, Arnold fabricated that too. The only way to know is read what it says on the barrel, everything else would be a guess.

Then did Brennan (or whoever gave the police this description) fabricate that "the type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester"?

Quote
Additionally JFK was killed with 6.5mm caliber bullets not a ?30 odd six.?

How did you determine that JFK was killed with 6.5mm caliber bullets?

Quote
Rowland reconstructed the assassination in his mind until he finally convinces himself there was another person.

You mean the way Brennan reconstructed the assassination in his mind until he finally convinced himself that it was Oswald he saw with a rifle?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2018, 06:06:54 PM »

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 697
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2018, 08:24:33 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You're lying again. I have stated many times over the years that I think LHO could've been involved, thus, he too is suspicious.

What I don't do like LNers is blame him for things there is NO evidence for. The claims of him shooting JFK, JBC and JDT are NOT supported by any evidence. End of story.

He could've been involved, but since NO real real investigation ever took place we will probably never know how.

In all your tens of thousands of silly posts, I've never seen you state that Oswald was "involved" or "suspicious."  Since you didn't miss a beat here exonerating him once again from any of the crimes that day, why do you believe he was "involved"and what do you believe he was involved in if there is no evidence? 
« Last Edit: April 26, 2018, 01:49:04 PM by Richard Smith »

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 2822
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2018, 11:36:44 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Further to the hilarious explanation of Oswald missing...

Representative FORD. When you noticed the police assembling the employees after the assassination, what prompted you to think that Oswald was not among them?
Mr. TRULY. I have asked myself that many times. I cannot give an answer. Unless it was the fact that I knew he was on the second floor, I had seen him 10 or 15 minutes, or whatever it was, before that. That might have brought that boy's name to my mind--because I was looking over there and he was the only one I missed at that time that I could think of. Subconsciously it might have been because I saw him on the second floor and I knew he was in the building.


Combine this with:

representative FORD. Had there been any traits that you had noticed from the time of his employment that might have made you think then that there was a connection between the shooting and Oswald?
Mr. TRULY. Not at all. In fact, I was fooled so completely by the sound of--the direction of the shot, that I did not believe still did not believe maybe I could not force myself to believe, that the shots came from that building until I learned that they found the gun and the shells there. So I had no feeling whatever that they did come from there.


Now, since he did not learn of any gun found until he talked to Fritz (Oswald missing) his subconscious mind didn't really have anything to work with to motivate Truly to report Oswald, did it?

Consider the conditions:

Mr. TRULY. When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse.
Mr. BELIN. Had they sealed off the building yet, do you know?
Mr. TRULY. I am sure they had.
Mr. BELIN. Then what?
Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.
So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.
First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.


So, the first floor is a madhouse, he sees SOME of his boys there and officers taking names. So why would he expect Oswald to be RIGHT there when he could have been gone out to see what happened and been prevented from reentering due to the lock down of the building?

Why does he only ask Shelley if Oswald is around and NOT his coworkers, especially THE guy to ask: Wesley Buell Frazier? The only guy known to hang out with Oswald and the guy who Truly himself assigned to train Oswald.

Truly's affidavit is even more dubious as he claims to have checked his employees and didn't find Lee. "Find" implies he was actively looking for Oswald which, according to his WC testimony, he was not.

That is supported by Frazier:

Mr. BALL - Did you hear anybody around there asking for Lee Oswald?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I didn't.


OK, he might have missed the search as he dived into the basement to lunch!

The final nail in the coffin to this fabrication is, by Truly's own admission, that there were officers taking names of employees on the upper floors where he had just seen Dougherty (fifth floor!) on his way down -- there is no viable explanation for Truly reporting Oswald "missing".


So, the first floor is a madhouse, he sees SOME of his boys there and officers taking names. So why would he expect Oswald to be RIGHT there when he could have been gone out to see what happened

Moreover....  Truly had seen Lee in the second floor lunchroom about ten minutes prior to witnessing the madhouse on the first floor and only SOME of his employees were present.....But he illuminated Lee Oswald as the ONLY employee who was mot present....   

The very fact that Roy Truly was obviously setting Lee Oswald up  should be enough to cause any reasoning person pause....

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2018, 11:36:44 PM »

Offline Jack Nessan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 175
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2018, 02:01:59 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
?30-odd six? rifle

How about a simple transcription error (Thirty Ought Six) by the court transcriber that was repeated and not corrected?

Mr. SPECTER - When you say, .30-odd-6, exactly what did you mean by that?
Mr. SPECTER - And is that a .30-odd-6 rifle that you have hunted deer with?
Mr. SPECTER - Was the rifle which you observed similar to, or perhaps identical with, .30-odd rifles which you have seen before?
Mr. SPECTER - Have you seen such .30-odd rifles before at close range which had telescopic sights?

In an FBI report dated 23/11/1963 it had "and holding what appeared to be a .306 rifle with telescopic sight on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository."

There is no "odd" in the description.

he finally convinces himself there was another person.

No - there was another person on the 6th floor who left remnants of his lunch exactly where Rowland saw the Negro gentleman who fit his description except for the age.

The gunman and BRW were on the same floor for 10 minutes.


The count of people altering Rowland's statement is now up to four. Maybe the problem is Rowland.

.306 ....Or the FBI Agent wrote it down exactly like he said it, Three OH Six. Just like the 30 Odd Six another cartridge that doesn't exist. The US military had recently developed a new cartridge to be used in the M1A's called the .308, pronounced Three OH Eight, Rowland makes up his own cartridge again and calls it the Three OH Six which is what the FBI Agent wrote down.  The British also had a cartridge called the Three OH Three (.303) from World War II. Once again he gets it wrong. Apparently he changed from Three OH Six to 30 Odd Six. Either way Specter shows he has know idea what he is talking about. Once again you cannot tell the caliber of a rifle from a distance.


===========================


All Rowland had to do was repeat his affidavit from 11/22 but he was unable to to that without embelishing the story. Rowland never seen anyone in the other window. The first mention of an additional person in the SN does not occurr until he is interviewed by the WC. Even then his description of the person is a developed as the interview progresses.


At first he isn't even sure what this supposed person looks like let alone that he describes BRW.

This is not a description of Bonnie Ray Williams. Rowland is not sure he is even a colored man.

Mr. ROWLAND - At the time I saw the man in the other window, I saw this man hanging out the window first. It was a colored man, I think.



Now he starts to add to the description. He is a Negro and an elderly one.

Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. ROWLAND - It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.



Now Rowland really adds to the description and it is definitely not a description of BRW. He even goes as far as to describe the height and weight of a man that he says is hanging out of the window.

Mr. SPECTER - Mr. Rowland, a couple of other questions.
Are you able to give us any other type of a description of the Negro gentleman whom you observed in the window we marked "A" with respect to height, weight, age?
Mr. ROWLAND - He was very thin, an elderly gentleman, bald or practically bald, very thin hair if he wasn't bald. Had on a plaid shirt. I think it was red and green, very bright color, that is why I remember it.
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us an estimate as to age?
Mr. ROWLAND - Fifty; possibly 55 or 60.
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us an estimate as to height?
Mr. ROWLAND - 5'8", 5'10", in that neighborhood. He was very slender, very thin.
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us a more definite description as to complexion?
Mr. ROWLAND - Very dark or fairly dark, not real dark compared to some Negroes, but fairly dark. Seemed like his face was either--I can't recall detail but it was either very wrinkled or marked in some way.

Number one that in no way is a description of BRW. Is there any real doubt why the WC did not believe a word that Rowland told them? He could not tell the same story twice. He is shown by Slpecter and the WC members over and over again to be fabricating his story and embellishing the details. This is why Ford finally asks him :

Representative FORD - Mr. Rowland, have you ever had occasion to go back to the scene and reconstruct it? Have you ever gone back--
The CHAIRMAN - Supposing we take a few minutes recess.
Mr. ROWLAND - The answer to that question is yes; I do all the time. I pass that area very frequently.






JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2018, 02:01:59 PM »

Offline Jack Nessan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 175
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #28 on: April 25, 2018, 02:07:04 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The proper pronunciation is thirty-aught-six. However, where I come from, it is commonly pronounced as thirty-odd six.  Arnold never made that one up.

Specter obviously felt he did. I completely agree with Specter.

Offline Jack Nessan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Not This Member!
    Thumbs Up
    This Member Has Made
    A Forum Donation!

  • Posts: 175
Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2018, 02:17:00 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then did Brennan (or whoever gave the police this description) fabricate that "the type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester"?

How did you determine that JFK was killed with 6.5mm caliber bullets?

You mean the way Brennan reconstructed the assassination in his mind until he finally convinced himself that it was Oswald he saw with a rifle?


I know exactly what is being referenced by the term 30-30 and Winchester type. Maybe this person has the same limited knowledge of firearms demonstrated by Rowland.

They did not find any trace of poison.

Brennan's contribution to the understanding of the assassination is not IDing LHO. I thought Curry said no one could place LHO with the rifle in the window. If you have better canidate than LHO as the shooter then explain it.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: There was No Roll Call at the TSBD !
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2018, 02:17:00 PM »

 

Mobile View