Jack Dougherty @12:30
Walt
TSBD employee Jack Dougherty admitted to being on the sixth floor just
seconds before the shooting which killed President Kennedy. The
Warren Commision issued a decree entitled, The Warren Report, in which
they invented scenarios to show that Lee Oswald was the killer. They
questioned hundreds of people and recorded their testimony, then they
selected the testimony that was most beneficial to their imagined
scenario. The basis of their scenario was: Lee Oswald fired a 6.5mm
Mannlicher Carcano rifle three times in 5.6 seconds, from the SE
corner window of the sixth floor of the TSBD, and killed President
Kennedy, wounded Texas Governor John Connally, and a spectator named
James Teague. They claimed that Lee Oswald was alone on the sixth
floor of the TSBD at 12:30 when the shots were fired. Their scenario
depicted Oswald as lurking on the sixth floor alone from 12:00 to
12:30 and then fleeing down the stairs to the second floor lunchroom
where he was confronted by DPD officer Marrion Baker about 90 seconds
later.
There isn't a shred of evidence to support their story that Lee Oswald
was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting. In fact the
absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
insanity.
The truth is ...There was a 30 to 35 year old, 165 to 175 pound, white
man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
just minutes before, and during the shooting. Several witnesses
reported seeing him there. This man could NOT have been Lee Oswald,
because the physical description did NOT fit Oswald and Oswald was
wearing DARK colored clothing at the time. So who could that gunman
have been??
Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty? He admitted that he was
on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting. He was very
nervous when he was questioned by the W.C., and gave confusing and
contradictory testimony. He said he went to the sixth floor at about
12:40 after eating his lunch and started filling book orders. That
can't possibly be true because the TSBD was swarming with cops at
12:40. He gave a clue to the true time that he went to the sixth
floor when he said that he had just left the sixth floor and arrived
on the fith floor when he heard a shot. It is an established fact
that the time for that first shot was 12:30, so he must have went to
the sixth floor at about 12:20, after eating his lunch.
Here's an excerpt from his testimony.
Mr. Ball.
Did you see him again that morning?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes; just one more time.
Mr. Ball.
Where was that?
Mr. Dougherty.
That was on the sixth floor.
Mr. Ball.
On the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
About what time of day?
Mr. Dougherty.
It was about 11 o'clock-that was the last time I saw him.
Mr. Ball.
What was he doing up there?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, as far as I could tell, he was getting some stock---as far as I
could tell.
Mr. Ball.
What were you doing there?
Mr. Dougherty.
I was getting some stock also.
Mr. Ball.
. And were there some other workmen up there at the time?
Mr. Dougherty.
Not that I know of.
Mr. Ball.
Well, do you remember Shelley, Dan Arce, Bonnie Williams, Bill
Lovelady, and Charlie Givens who were working up there that morning---
laying floor on the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Oh, yes; they were laying floor---yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
And were they there at the time you were there?
Mr. Dougherty.
Oh, yes, sir; they were there---yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Is that the same time you saw Oswald?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir; just about that time.
Mr. Ball.
And how long were you on the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, just long enough to get some stock.
Mr. Ball.
Where did you go then?
Mr. Dougherty.
I went to the fifth floor.
Mr. BALL. What did you do then?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I went to the fifth floor to get some stock also on the fifth
floor.
Mr. Ball.
Then what did you do?
Mr. Dougherty.
Then, just about that time---I thought I heard---
Mr. Ball.
Wait a minute---did you go to lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I went back downstairs to eat lunch---yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
What time?
Mr. Dougherty.
Oh, it was 12 o'clock.
Mr. BALL. When you talked to the FBI men, I've got a statement here
dated the 19th of December 1963, a statement from Special Agent
William O. Johnson, and he reports that you told him that you saw Lee
Harvey Oswald at approximately 8 a.m. when he, Oswald, arrived.
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. Ball.
That you saw Oswald again at approximately 11 a.m. on the sixth
floor?.
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. Ball.
But you didn't see him again after that, is that your testimony?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
Is that the truth?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. Ball.
And it also says, this report from Mr. Johnson, states that you told
him that just prior to 12 noon you and five other men were working on
the sixth
floor. Were you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes; we were working on the sixth floor.
Mr. Ball.
What were you doing?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I was getting some stock off of the sixth floor.
Mr. Ball.
You weren't helping the men lay floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Did you go down to lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
To what floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
The first floor.
Mr. Ball.
How did you get down there?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well---used the elevator.
Mr. Ball.
Did you go down alone or with someone?
Mr. Dougherty.
I went down alone.
Mr. Ball.
Where did you eat your lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
In the domino room.
Mr. Ball.
Now, what time did you go back to work?
Mr. Dougherty.
Oh, at 12:30.
Mr. Ball.
Did you know that the President was going to pass in a motorcade that
noon?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, they said something about it.
Mr. Ball.
Did you intend to go out and watch him?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, I would have loved to have went out and watched
him but the steps were so crowded---there was no way in the world I
could get out there.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a look at it---did you go out and take a look
at it, or didn't you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well---no, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Now, you were on the first floor in the domino room when you
finished your lunch, didn't you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And did you stay there any length of time after you finished
your lunch?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. No, sir---just a short length of time.
Mr. Ball.
Then what did you do?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, then, I went back to work.
Mr. Ball.
And where did you go to work?
Mr. Dougherty.
Let me see---oh, up to the sixth floor.
Mr. Ball.
Did you go to the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
About what time?
Mr. Dougherty.
At about 12:40---it was about 12:40.
Mr. Ball.
Had you heard any shots before that?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes---I heard one---it sounded like a backfire.
Mr. Ball.
Where were you when you heard that shot?
Mr. Dougherty.
I was on the fifth floor.
Mr. Ball.
You were on the fifth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Now, When you left your lunch, did you go to the fifth floor
or the sixth floor to go back to work?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. I went on the fifth floor when I was getting ready to
go down to eat lunch.
Mr. Ball.
Yes; and then what happened?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, at that time--I was about 10 feet away---
Mr. Ball.
Wait a minute---did you hear the shots before or after you had your
lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
Before---before I ate my lunch.
Mr. Ball.
You heard shots before you ate your lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
Let's see---yes, I believe I did.
Mr. Ball.
Well, now, you remember having your lunch, do you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember after you had your lunch, you went back to
work that day?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
When you talked on the day this accident happened, on the 22d of
November 1963, in a statement made to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and, Mr. Dougherty, you told them you went down to the
first floor to eat your lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. Ball.
And that you went back to work?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And you told him on the 19th day of December, Mr. Johnson,
that you went back to work on the sixth floor, and as soon as you
arrived on the sixth floor, you went down to the fifth floor to get
some stock?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir; that's right.
Mr. Ball.
And while you were on the fifth floor, you heard a loud noise?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right---it sounded like a car backfiring.
Mr. Ball.
. And did you hear more than one loud explosion or noise?
Mr. Dougherty.
No; that was the only one I heard.
Mr. Ball.
You only heard one?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
And where did it sound like it came from?
Mr. Dougherty.
It sounded like it came from overhead somewhere.
Mr. Ball.
>From overhead?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
How did you get to the fifth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Elevator.
Mr. Ball.
You were on the fifth floor when you heard this, were you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
Which elevator did you take?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, you see, there's one on this side and one on this
side the one on this side is the one I took.
Mr. Ball.
Well, now, "The one on this side and the one on this side," doesn't
mean much when it's written down.
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I know it.
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me whether it was the east side or the west
side elevator?
Mr. Dougherty.
East side.
Mr. Ball.
Is it the one that you punch a button on?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Or the one that you use a control on?
Mr. Dougherty.
It's the one you push a button on.
Mr. Ball.
The one you push a button on?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
I believe that is the west side, isn't it?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, I believe it is.
Mr. Ball.
Now, that's the one you took up?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
Where did you take that---to what floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
I took it up to the sixth floor.
Mr. Ball.
Then what did you do?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, when I got through getting stock off of the sixth floor, I came
back down to the fifth floor.
Mr. Ball.
What did you do on the fifth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I got some stock.
Mr. Ball.
Then what happened then?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, then immediately I heard a loud noise---it
sounded like a car backfiring, and I came back down to the first
floor, and I asked Eddie Piper, I said, "Piper, what was that?" I
says, "Has the President been shot?'. He said, "Yes."
Mr. BALL. You didn't say--did you say, 'Has the President been
shot?"---you told the FBI agent that you went down to the first floor
and you saw a man named Eddie Piper and asked him if he heard a loud
noise.
Mr. Dougherty.
I asked him that too.
Mr. Ball.
And Piper said he had heard three loud noises and told you that
somebody had Just shot the President; is that right?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. BALL. Who mentioned the fact that the President had been shot
first--- you or Eddie Piper?
Mr. Dougherty.
Eddie Piper.
Mr. Ball.
Did you say anything to Piper about the President being shot?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir.
Mr. BALL. When you talked to Eddie Piper, did you know that the
President had been shot?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir; I didn't know that at the time.
Mr. Ball.
When is the first time you heard that the President had been shot?
Mr. Dougherty.
When Eddie told me that.
Mr. Ball.
Eddie told you that?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. BALL. You told Mr. Johnson of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
that when you were on the fifth floor, you heard a loud noise and it
appeared to have come from within the building, but you couldn't tell
where you told him that on the 19th; did you tell him that?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. On the day that this happened, on the 22d of November, you
told the FBI agents Ellington and Anderson that you heard "a loud
explosion which sounded like a rifle shot coming from the next floor
above me."
Now, did you tell them that it sounded like a rifle shot, coming from
the next floor above you, or didn't you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well; I believe I told them it sounded like a car backfiring.
Mr. Ball.
Well, did you tell them it sounded like it was from the floor above
you, or didn't you tell them that?
Mr. Dougherty.
No.
Mr. Ball.
You did not tell them that?
Mr. Dougherty.
No.
Mr. Ball.
Did it sound like it came from the floor above you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, at the time it did---yes.
Mr. BALL. Tell me this---when you heard that explosion or whatever it
was--- that loud noise, where were you on the fifth floor-tell me
exactly where you were ?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, I was about 10 feet from the west elevator---the
west side of the elevator.
Mr. Ball.
That's the elevator that uses the push button; is that right?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
And what were you doing?
Mr. Dougherty.
I was getting some stock.
Mr. Ball.
And what did you do then?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I came on back downstairs.
Mr. Ball.
How did you come downstairs?
Mr. Dougherty.
I used that push button elevator on the west side.
Mr. Ball.
Did you hear Mr. Truly yell anything up the elevator shaft?
Mr. Dougherty.
I didn't hear anybody yell.
Mr. BALL. Or, did you see Mr. Truly?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, when the FBI men---I imagine it was who it was---
he showed me his credentials, but he asked me who the manager was, and
I told him, "Mr. Truly." He told me to go find him. Well, I didn't
know where he was so I started from the first floor and Just started
looking for him, and .by the time I got to the sixth floor, they had
found a gum and shells.
Mr. BALL. When you went up to the sixth floor, it was after they found
the shotgun and shells?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Yes, sir; and I found out later he was on the fourth
floor, which I didn't find.
Mr. Ball.
Did you ever see a gun around there?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir; I sure didn't.
Mr. Ball.
Did you ever see anybody with a gun in the place?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Did you see any strangers in the building that day?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir.
Mr. Ball.
Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. Ball.
Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw
him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. Ball.
When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, it was--the day after it happened.
Mr. Ball.
Are you sure you were on the fifth floor when you heard the shots?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes, I'm positive.
Mr. Ball.
Did you see any other employee on the fifth floor?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. No, sir; I didn't see nobody---there wasn't nobody on
the fifth floor at all---it was just myself.
Mr. BALL. You told me that just before you heard the shots, you had
been on the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
And then you went down to the fifth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
Mr. BALL. Did you see anybody on the sixth floor when you were there,
before you went to the fifth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
Oh, yes; I did.
Mr. Ball.
Who?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, there was Bill Shelley, Billy Lovelady---
Mr. Ball.
That was in the morning, wasn't it?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. Ball.
That wasn't after lunch, was it?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir.
Mr. Ball.
After lunch, did you ever see them on the sixth floor?
Mr. Dougherty.
No, sir; I didn't.
Mr. Ball.
Now, did you hear this shot either before or after lunch?
Mr. Dougherty.
It was before lunch it was before lunch.
Mr. Ball.
You think it was before lunch you heard the shot?
Mr. Dougherty.
I believe it was--yes, sir.
Mr. Ball.
And you were alone, were you?
Mr. Dougherty.
Yes.
Mr. BALL. That's all I have to ask you, and this will be written up
and if you would like to come down and read it and sign it, you can,
or you can waive your signature.
What do you want to do?
I'm sorry it's so long and confused but I wanted to post the whole
thing rather than select the statements that support my contention
that perhaps the W.C. was right in saying that JFK was killed by a
lone nut.....they just got the wrong lone nut.
Walt
aeffects
Great post.... the longer this case drags on, more I think even
daBugliosi could defend LHO, and WIN.... Nutter's aren't going to like
this...
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>Walt,
>
>Great post.... the longer this case drags on, more I think even
>daBugliosi could defend LHO, and WIN.... Nutter's aren't going to like
>this...
Of course he could. A lawyer can argue *anything*... but he's more believable
when he has the facts on his side...
Bud
Walt wrote:
> TSBD employee Jack Dougherty admitted to being on the sixth floor just
> seconds before the shooting which killed President Kennedy. The
> Warren Commision issued a decree entitled, The Warren Report, in which
> they invented scenarios to show that Lee Oswald was the killer. They
> questioned hundreds of people and recorded their testimony, then they
> selected the testimony that was most beneficial to their imagined
> scenario. The basis of their scenario was: Lee Oswald fired a 6.5mm
> Mannlicher Carcano rifle three times in 5.6 seconds, from the SE
> corner window of the sixth floor of the TSBD, and killed President
> Kennedy, wounded Texas Governor John Connally, and a spectator named
> James Teague. They claimed that Lee Oswald was alone on the sixth
> floor of the TSBD at 12:30 when the shots were fired. Their scenario
> depicted Oswald as lurking on the sixth floor alone from 12:00 to
> 12:30 and then fleeing down the stairs to the second floor lunchroom
> where he was confronted by DPD officer Marrion Baker about 90 seconds
> later.
>
> There isn't a shred of evidence to support their story that Lee Oswald
> was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
Besides a witness who said he saw him there.
> In fact the
> absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> insanity.
Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
> The truth is ...There was a 30 to 35 year old, 165 to 175 pound, white
> man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
> just minutes before, and during the shooting.
<snicker> Walt prefaces it with "The truth is...", and then goes on
to tell a series of lies. Do you get paid by the lie, Walt?
> Several witnesses
> reported seeing him there. This man could NOT have been Lee Oswald,
Sure it could.. You just pretend there are reasons to believe it
couldn`t be.
> because the physical description did NOT fit Oswald
The descriptions that went over the airwaves at both the JFK murder
and the Tippit murder are reasonable descriptions of Oz.
> and Oswald was
> wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
> So who could that gunman
> have been??
Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
> Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty?
Anybody but you precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
> He admitted that he was
> on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
luckily he was able to clear himself also.
> He was very
> nervous when he was questioned by the W.C., and gave confusing and
> contradictory testimony.
Couldn`t be he was an excitable person, who became confused when
pressed? Didn`t Todd produce a medical report from the military that
said something along those lines?
> He said he went to the sixth floor at about
> 12:40 after eating his lunch and started filling book orders. That
> can't possibly be true because the TSBD was swarming with cops at
> 12:40.
This is sure to stump Walt. For some reason, he can`t wrap his tiny
mind around the consept that people don`t generally know the time, or
keep accurate track of how much has passed, how long things take, ect.
> He gave a clue to the true time that he went to the sixth
> floor when he said that he had just left the sixth floor and arrived
> on the fith floor when he heard a shot. It is an established fact
> that the time for that first shot was 12:30, so he must have went to
> the sixth floor at about 12:20, after eating his lunch.
I wouldn`t be confident that Doughtery was on the fifth floor when
he heard the shot. Nothing he says is worth much without
corroboration.
> Here's an excerpt from his testimony.
<SNIP>
>
> I'm sorry it's so long and confused but I wanted to post the whole
> thing rather than select the statements that support my contention
> that perhaps the W.C. was right in saying that JFK was killed by a
> lone nut.....they just got the wrong lone nut.
Someone needs to throw a net over you. Do you really think you`ve
presented any real reason to consider Doughtery a suspect?
>
> Walt
aeffects
stuff it dudster.... what is interesting is a Nutter using the term
*suspect* in a sentence not having Oswald's name associated with same.
That's real progress Dudster..... Keep Coming Back! We'll have you
fixed up in no-time....
>
> > Walt
Bud
aeffects wrote:
> Walt,
>
> Great post....
Yah, kudos to Walt, finding Doughtey`s testimony, and presenting
it. Impressive.
> the longer this case drags on, more I think even
> daBugliosi could defend LHO, and WIN.... Nutter's aren't going to like
> this...
<snicker> Yah, this is killer stuff. Here, I thought the building
was empty, but Walt has found out at this late date that there was in
fact other people in the building, any one of which could have been
using Oz`s rifle to kill JFK.
If Ric is reading this, this is what defines these people as kooks.
Walt presents the weakest argument imaginable, offers nothing to
support it (If Walt were to establish that Doughtery was wearing white
that day, at least that would be *something*), and gets applause from
the other kooks like he actually made some valid points.
<SNIP>
Bud
Well, orginally, when the photo of Doughtery holding the murder
weapon and the copy of "Guns and Amoo" surfaced, I thought he might
have been involved. Then it occurred to me that if a criminal
mastermind like Jack Doughtery wanted to implicate a fellow employee,
he`d have said "Fuck yeah, I saw Oswald come in with a package, musta
been three, four foot long"
.
Walt
Dougherty had already told the FBI that Oswald wasn't carrying
anything when he entered the TSBD that morning, so he couldn't blurt
out something like you propose..... However he could say that he
"THOUGHT" someone else had seen Oswald with a big package.
Here's his lie about that bit of evidence.
Mr. Ball.
Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. Ball.
Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw
him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
r. Ball.
When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. Dougherty.
Well, it was--the day after it happened.
>
>
>
>
>
> > stuff it dudster.... what is interesting is a Nutter using the term
> > *suspect* in a sentence not having Oswald's name associated with same.
> > That's real progress Dudster..... Keep Coming Back! We'll have you
> > fixed up in no-time....
>
> > > > Walt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt
> Walt wrote:
> > TSBD employee Jack Dougherty admitted to being on the sixth floor just
> > seconds before the shooting which killed President Kennedy. The
> > Warren Commision issued a decree entitled, The Warren Report, in which
> > they invented scenarios to show that Lee Oswald was the killer. They
> > questioned hundreds of people and recorded their testimony, then they
> > selected the testimony that was most beneficial to their imagined
> > scenario. The basis of their scenario was: Lee Oswald fired a 6.5mm
> > Mannlicher Carcano rifle three times in 5.6 seconds, from the SE
> > corner window of the sixth floor of the TSBD, and killed President
> > Kennedy, wounded Texas Governor John Connally, and a spectator named
> > James Teague. They claimed that Lee Oswald was alone on the sixth
> > floor of the TSBD at 12:30 when the shots were fired. Their scenario
> > depicted Oswald as lurking on the sixth floor alone from 12:00 to
> > 12:30 and then fleeing down the stairs to the second floor lunchroom
> > where he was confronted by DPD officer Marrion Baker about 90 seconds
> > later.
>
> > There isn't a shred of evidence to support their story that Lee Oswald
> > was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
>
> Besides a witness who said he saw him there.
Name a single ( or more ) witness who saw a 24 year old, 140 pound,
man dressed in a reddish brown shirt and dark gray trousers on the
sixth floor at the time of the shooting. Either name that witness
or admit that your are a liar.
>
> > In fact the
> > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > insanity.
>
> Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
Wow!!... What a gross oversimplification of the IMAGINED event!!
Surely you can do better than this insipid display.....
>
> > The truth is ...There was a 30 to 35 year old, 165 to 175 pound, white
> > man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
> > just minutes before, and during the shooting.
>
> <snicker> Walt prefaces it with "The truth is...", and then goes on
> to tell a series of lies. Do you get paid by the lie, Walt?
List the lies......
> > Several witnesses
> > reported seeing him there. This man could NOT have been Lee Oswald,
>
> Sure it could.. You just pretend there are reasons to believe it
> couldn`t be.
>
> > because the physical description did NOT fit Oswald
>
> The descriptions that went over the airwaves at both the JFK murder
> and the Tippit murder are reasonable descriptions of Oz.
The descriptions that were broadcast on the police radio were so vague
that they could have arrested 22,743 "suspects" in Dallas that day.
But we are not talking about the police radio transmissions....I
SPECIFICALLY said that Brennan, Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all gave
descriptions of the white clothing clad man on the sixth floor. Those
descriptions did NOT fit Lee Oswald.
>
> > and Oswald was
> > wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
>
> So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
No there isn't any real conflicting information ....... I know that
you've attempted to say Charles Givens said Oswald was wearing green
that day..... but November 22 is not St Paddy's day, and I believe it
was later learned that Givens was color blind.
>
> > So who could that gunman
> > have been??
>
> Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
>
> > Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty?
>
> Anybody but you precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
Naw....Mrs Reid had a couple of didtinguishing features that precluded
her as being the WHITE CLOTHING clad gun MAN.
>
> > He admitted that he was
> > on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
>
> He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
> that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
> luckily he was able to clear himself also.
Nobody verified that he was on the fifth floor when the shots were
fired..... Just because he said that, doesn't make it a fact.
In fact when you read his testimony a person would have substantial
reason to doubt his veracity.
>
> > He was very
> > nervous when he was questioned by the W.C., and gave confusing and
> > contradictory testimony.
>
> Couldn`t be he was an excitable person, who became confused when
> pressed? Didn`t Todd produce a medical report from the military that
> said something along those lines?
Doesn't change anything.... so what if he had received a medical
discharge for being mentally unstable. I believe he was 39 years old,
and still lived with his Mommy and Daddy, and he was a "loner" That
profile fits very nicely with the Warren Commissions description of "a
lone nut "
>
> > He said he went to the sixth floor at about
> > 12:40 after eating his lunch and started filling book orders. That
> > can't possibly be true because the TSBD was swarming with cops at
> > 12:40.
>
> This is sure to stump Walt. For some reason, he can`t wrap his tiny
> mind around the consept that people don`t generally know the time, or
> keep accurate track of how much has passed, how long things take, ect.
>
> > He gave a clue to the true time that he went to the sixth
> > floor when he said that he had just left the sixth floor and arrived
> > on the fith floor when he heard a shot. It is an established fact
> > that the time for that first shot was 12:30, so he must have went to
> > the sixth floor at about 12:20, after eating his lunch.
>
> I wouldn`t be confident that Doughtery was on the fifth floor when
> he heard the shot. Nothing he says is worth much without
> corroboration.
I'm not surprised that you would attempt to discredit Dougherty's
testimony ....Hell, the Warren Commission's silver tounge did that
repeatedly during the questioning...... For example when Dougherty
said he went down to the first floor and saw Eddie Piper, and asked
him if the president had been shot. The silver tongue
said ...Whoa....You don't want to say that!! Let me put words in your
mouth....
>
> > Here's an excerpt from his testimony.
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
>
> > I'm sorry it's so long and confused but I wanted to post the whole
> > thing rather than select the statements that support my contention
> > that perhaps the W.C. was right in saying that JFK was killed by a
> > lone nut.....they just got the wrong lone nut.
>
> Someone needs to throw a net over you. Do you really think you`ve
> presented any real reason to consider Doughtery a suspect?
Not for a person with his head in his ass.......
Walt
David Von Pein
Monday's --- Wesley Frazier.
The rest of next week's make-believe suspects: TBA.
Walt
Mr. Ball.
Then what happened then?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, then immediately I heard a loud noise---it
sounded like a car backfiring, and I came back down to the first
floor, and I asked Eddie Piper, I said, "Piper, what was that?" I
says, "Has the President been shot?'. He said, "Yes."
Mr. BALL. You didn't say--did you say, 'Has the President been
shot?"---you told the FBI agent that you went down to the first floor
and you saw a man named Eddie Piper and asked him if he heard a loud
noise.
Mr. Dougherty.
I asked him that too.
Mr. Ball.
And Piper said he had heard three loud noises and told you that
somebody had Just shot the President; is that right?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
>
>
>
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 31 Mar, 11:51, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Walt wrote:
> > > TSBD employee Jack Dougherty admitted to being on the sixth floor just
> > > seconds before the shooting which killed President Kennedy. The
> > > Warren Commision issued a decree entitled, The Warren Report, in which
> > > they invented scenarios to show that Lee Oswald was the killer. They
> > > questioned hundreds of people and recorded their testimony, then they
> > > selected the testimony that was most beneficial to their imagined
> > > scenario. The basis of their scenario was: Lee Oswald fired a 6.5mm
> > > Mannlicher Carcano rifle three times in 5.6 seconds, from the SE
> > > corner window of the sixth floor of the TSBD, and killed President
> > > Kennedy, wounded Texas Governor John Connally, and a spectator named
> > > James Teague. They claimed that Lee Oswald was alone on the sixth
> > > floor of the TSBD at 12:30 when the shots were fired. Their scenario
> > > depicted Oswald as lurking on the sixth floor alone from 12:00 to
> > > 12:30 and then fleeing down the stairs to the second floor lunchroom
> > > where he was confronted by DPD officer Marrion Baker about 90 seconds
> > > later.
> >
> > > There isn't a shred of evidence to support their story that Lee Oswald
> > > was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
> >
> > Besides a witness who said he saw him there.
>
> Name a single ( or more ) witness who saw a 24 year old, 140 pound,
Unestablished. Conflicting information.
> man dressed in a reddish brown shirt
Unestablished. Conflicting information. A big part of your problem
is that the things you consider facts, aren`t.
> and dark gray trousers on the
> sixth floor at the time of the shooting. Either name that witness
> or admit that your are a liar.
I said a witness said he saw Oz there. Show what I actually said to
be a lie. Idiot.
> > > In fact the
> > > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > > insanity.
> >
> > Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
>
> Wow!!... What a gross oversimplification of the IMAGINED event!!
Well, kook conjecture might have him repelling down the side of the
building, but I think the stairs are a more likely.
> Surely you can do better than this insipid display.....
Being an LN means I have to entertain the simple solutions first.
You kooks leap right over the mundane, to the fantastic.
> > > The truth is ...There was a 30 to 35 year old, 165 to 175 pound, white
> > > man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
> > > just minutes before, and during the shooting.
> >
> > <snicker> Walt prefaces it with "The truth is...", and then goes on
> > to tell a series of lies. Do you get paid by the lie, Walt?
>
> List the lies......
Again? I`ve been over them numerous times. Others have, going back
years. Will it sink in if it is explained to you one more time? Lets
do it this way... quote Brennan saying 30-35, for starters. Then quote
him saying the man he saw was "attired in a white shirt and trousers".
When you fail to do those two things, the lies will become apparent to
you as they are to me.
> > > Several witnesses
> > > reported seeing him there. This man could NOT have been Lee Oswald,
> >
> > Sure it could.. You just pretend there are reasons to believe it
> > couldn`t be.
> >
> > > because the physical description did NOT fit Oswald
> >
> > The descriptions that went over the airwaves at both the JFK murder
> > and the Tippit murder are reasonable descriptions of Oz.
>
> The descriptions that were broadcast on the police radio were so vague
> that they could have arrested 22,743 "suspects" in Dallas that day.
I see you have decided not to contest what I said.
> But we are not talking about the police radio transmissions....I
> SPECIFICALLY said that Brennan, Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all gave
> descriptions of the white clothing clad man on the sixth floor. Those
> descriptions did NOT fit Lee Oswald.
A witness said she saw Oz wearing his white t-shirt shortly after
the assassination. Another witness said Oz commonly worked in his t-
shirt.
> > > and Oswald was
> > > wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
> >
> > So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
>
> No there isn't any real conflicting information ....... I know that
> you've attempted to say Charles Givens said Oswald was wearing green
> that day.....
No, Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the assassination, said he
was wearing a white t-shirt. This represents conflicting information
as to what Oz was wearing at the time.
> but November 22 is not St Paddy's day, and I believe it
> was later learned that Givens was color blind.
A color blind person wouldn`t offer colors, would he? He`d just say
"I can`t tell you what color his clothes are, I`m color blind".
> > > So who could that gunman
> > > have been??
> >
> > Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
> >
> > > Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty?
> >
> > Anybody but your precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
>
> Naw....Mrs Reid had a couple of didtinguishing features that precluded
> her as being the WHITE CLOTHING clad gun MAN.
Couldn`t she have been flat chested?
> > > He admitted that he was
> > > on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
> >
> > He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
> > that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
> > luckily he was able to clear himself also.
>
> Nobody verified that he was on the fifth floor when the shots were
> fired.....
Or that he was on the sixth. You inadvertently made my point.
> Just because he said that, doesn't make it a fact.
Yet you accept him saying he was on the sixth as solid information.
> In fact when you read his testimony a person would have substantial
> reason to doubt his veracity.
Never change, Walt, stay the perfect idiot you are. You build a
premise solely off the testimony of a witness, then you attack the
veracity of the witness you based your premise on.
> > > He was very
> > > nervous when he was questioned by the W.C., and gave confusing and
> > > contradictory testimony.
> >
> > Couldn`t be he was an excitable person, who became confused when
> > pressed? Didn`t Todd produce a medical report from the military that
> > said something along those lines?
>
> Doesn't change anything....
Not to you. You have no interest in viewing information in the
proper context.
>so what if he had received a medical
> discharge for being mentally unstable. I believe he was 39 years old,
> and still lived with his Mommy and Daddy, and he was a "loner" That
> profile fits very nicely with the Warren Commissions description of "a
> lone nut "
The WC didn`t decide a lone nut committed the assassination, and
then went out looking for someone who fit that profile. They had many,
many indications pointing to Oz, and an examination of him as a person
led to a "lone nut" conclusion. You are working backwards, as usual.
> > > He said he went to the sixth floor at about
> > > 12:40 after eating his lunch and started filling book orders. That
> > > can't possibly be true because the TSBD was swarming with cops at
> > > 12:40.
> >
> > This is sure to stump Walt. For some reason, he can`t wrap his tiny
> > mind around the concept that people don`t generally know the time, or
> > keep accurate track of how much has passed, how long things take, ect.
> >
> > > He gave a clue to the true time that he went to the sixth
> > > floor when he said that he had just left the sixth floor and arrived
> > > on the fith floor when he heard a shot. It is an established fact
> > > that the time for that first shot was 12:30, so he must have went to
> > > the sixth floor at about 12:20, after eating his lunch.
> >
> > I wouldn`t be confident that Doughtery was on the fifth floor when
> > he heard the shot. Nothing he says is worth much without
> > corroboration.
>
> I'm not surprised that you would attempt to discredit Dougherty's
> testimony ...
I`m not trying to discredit it, I`m trying to view it in the proper
context. the man flatly contradicts himself numerous times. He is
obviously a confused individual. This is just another case of a kook
offering sand, and claiming it`s concrete. But, wasn`t it you above
who said "In fact when you read his testimony a person would have
sunstantial reason to doubt his veracity." Isn`t this discrediting his
testimony?
>.Hell, the Warren Commission's silver tounge did that
> repeatedly during the questioning...... For example when Dougherty
> said he went down to the first floor and saw Eddie Piper, and asked
> him if the president had been shot. The silver tongue
> said ...Whoa....You don't want to say that!! Let me put words in your
> mouth....
No, he asked him if he told the FBI who interviewed him something
different than what he was saying. Don`t you think a clarification is
in order if a witness gives conflicting information? But, what is
kooky is that your imagination has both these men as conspirators, one
as assassin, and one as cover-up artist. They are cahooting as they
speak, but clever Walt can discern this cahooting, and see it for what
it really is. Everybody is involved in Walt World, except one person.
> > > Here's an excerpt from his testimony.
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> >
> >
> > > I'm sorry it's so long and confused but I wanted to post the whole
> > > thing rather than select the statements that support my contention
> > > that perhaps the W.C. was right in saying that JFK was killed by a
> > > lone nut.....they just got the wrong lone nut.
> >
> > Someone needs to throw a net over you. Do you really think you`ve
> > presented any real reason to consider Doughtery a suspect?
>
> Not for a person with his head in his ass.......
You`ve established he was in the building, and expressed that you
don`t think he was where he said he was when the shots were fired. So,
you base this theory solely on what Doughtery says, and then throw out
parts of what Doughtery said that are inconvenient to your theory.
> Walt
>
<SNIP>
Walt
Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described the mans shirt as.." a
very light color, probably white, open at the collar. and he was
wearing a T- shirt beneath that light colored sport shirt. So your
argument about the guy wearing only a T-shirt is just plain dumb.
It's nothing but a desperate attempt of an egotistical snob grasping
at straws to save face. You simply don't want to admit that you "Mr
I'm superior Bud" have been suckered by charlatans just as Oswald was
suckered.
When you're dealing with a liar....that's the way it is. That's
exactly why I posted his testimony, so we can debate the points that
are conflicting.
>
> > In fact when you read his testimony a person would have substantial
> > reason to doubt his veracity.
>
> Never change, Walt, stay the perfect idiot you are. You build a
> premise solely off the testimony of a witness, then you attack the
> veracity of the witness you based your premise on.
The point being..... Dougherty was a liar. He was lying through his
teeth and Ball weas helping him.
Mr. Ball.
Then what happened then?
Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, then immediately I heard a loud noise---it
sounded like a car backfiring, and I came back down to the first
floor, and I asked Eddie Piper, I said, "Piper, what was that?" I
says, "Has the President been shot?'. He said, "Yes."
Mr. BALL. You didn't say--did you say, 'Has the President been
shot?"---you told the FBI agent that you went down to the first floor
and you saw a man named Eddie Piper and asked him if he heard a loud
noise.
Mr. Dougherty.
I asked him that too.
Mr. Ball.
And Piper said he had heard three loud noises and told you that
somebody had Just shot the President; is that right?
Mr. Dougherty.
That's right.
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Let's try it this way....... The truth is there was in fact a man who
did NOT fit Oswald's physical description on the sixth floor with a
rifle at 12:30 that day. Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt, which they all
described as being white, Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar. The
collar was open at the neck, and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
beneath the light colored sport shirt. Howard Brennan said the gunman
was wearing trousers that were a little lighter colored than his
shirt.
Lee Oswald had just celebrated his 24th birthday, he weighed 140
pounds according to his booking sheet. He was wearing a reddish brown
shirt with a white T-shirt beneath it, and dark gray trousers at the
time of the shooting. He went to his room and changed his clothes
before going to the Texas theater. He put his reddish brown shirt and
dark gray trousers in a dresser drawer in his room. The police
recovered the shirt and trousers from that dresser drawer later that
afternoon and took photos of the items the recovered from his room.
the shirt and trousers are two of the items in the photographs. There
are also memos written by the cops who searched his room in which they
described the shirt and trousers that they recovered.
All of the evidence indicates that Lee Oswald was NOT the man with the
rifle who was dressed in the white clothing.
Walt
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Bud
<snicker> They all said the exact same thing, eh? Rowland, in his
afidavit said the man he saw was wearing a "light-colored shirt, open
at neck". Edwards told the WC that the man was wearing :light colored
shirt, short sleeve and open neck". His affidavit said "yellow or
white shirt". Fischer told the WC "And he had-- he had on an open neck
shirt, but it-- uh-- could have been a sport shirt or a t-shirt. It
was light in color, possibly white".
Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the shots, said "What he was
wearing, he had on a white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers".
Oz was wearing this t-shirt when arrested...
http://rotten.com/library/bio/crime/assassins/lee-harvey-oswald/oswald-mugshot.jpg
> So your
> argument about the guy wearing only a T-shirt is just plain dumb.
Even though one of the witnesses you names said it could have been
a t-shirt the man was wearing?
> It's nothing but a desperate attempt of an egotistical snob grasping
> at straws to save face.
Why didn`t you include all the parts of the descriptions that are a
close fit to Oz, the brown hair, 22-24 year old, slender descriptions
these men gave?
> You simply don't want to admit that you "Mr
> I'm superior Bud" have been suckered by charlatans just as Oswald was
> suckered.
You simply shouldn`t be looking into this case at all. You don`t
have the barest necessities for reasoned analysis.
You need me to take you by the hand, and point out all the
contradictions?
> > > In fact when you read his testimony a person would have substantial
> > > reason to doubt his veracity.
> >
> > Never change, Walt, stay the perfect idiot you are. You build a
> > premise solely off the testimony of a witness, then you attack the
> > veracity of the witness you based your premise on.
>
> The point being..... Dougherty was a liar. He was lying through his
> teeth and Ball weas helping him.
>
> Mr. Ball.
> Then what happened then?
> Mr. DOUGHERTY. Well, then immediately I heard a loud noise---it
> sounded like a car backfiring, and I came back down to the first
> floor, and I asked Eddie Piper, I said, "Piper, what was that?" I
> says, "Has the President been shot?'. He said, "Yes."
> Mr. BALL. You didn't say--did you say, 'Has the President been
> shot?"---you told the FBI agent that you went down to the first floor
> and you saw a man named Eddie Piper and asked him if he heard a loud
> noise.
> Mr. Dougherty.
> I asked him that too.
> Mr. Ball.
> And Piper said he had heard three loud noises and told you that
> somebody had Just shot the President; is that right?
> Mr. Dougherty.
> That's right.
What obviously happened was that Doughtery told the FBI when they
interviewed him that Piper told him the President had been shot. Then,
Doughtery told Ball that it was he, Doughtery, who told Piper the
President had been shot. Ball had read the FBI report, and caught the
conflicting information, so tried to get a clarification on the
matter. You really shouldn`t be looking into these things at all,
befuddled as you are by simple things.
<SNIP>
aeffects
Dudster you're not a litigator, you be da backroom researcher...
<snicker> -or- <snort-snort-snort> what-a-dweeb!
Bud
> > you as they are to me.
>
> Let's try it this way....... The truth is there was in fact a man who
> did NOT fit Oswald's physical description on the sixth floor with a
> rifle at 12:30 that day.
No, the truth is that it was Oz firing, and the description Brennan
gave of him wasn`t a perfect one.
> Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
about what the witnesses say?
> which they all
> described as being white,
Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
> Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
> The
> collar was open at the neck,
Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
> and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> beneath the light colored sport shirt.
One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
> Howard Brennan said the gunman
> was wearing trousers that were a little lighter colored than his
> shirt.
Givens said Oz was wearing green clothes. Does this mean it wasn`t
Oz he spoke to on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
> Lee Oswald had just celebrated his 24th birthday, he weighed 140
> pounds according to his booking sheet.
But not his autopsy. And establish as fact that people casually
scanning a crowd should accurately guess the weights of the people
they look at.
> He was wearing a reddish brown
> shirt with a white T-shirt beneath it, and dark gray trousers at the
> time of the shooting.
Not according to the only person who saw Oz at the time of the
shooting.
> He went to his room and changed his clothes
> before going to the Texas theater.
His pants, anyway.
> He put his reddish brown shirt and
> dark gray trousers in a dresser drawer in his room.
What is the CE number of the shirt in the drawer?
> The police
> recovered the shirt and trousers from that dresser drawer later that
> afternoon and took photos of the items the recovered from his room.
> the shirt and trousers are two of the items in the photographs.
And they took pictures of the shirt Oz was wearing when arrested,
CE150. It has the hole in the right sleeve that Mrs Bledsoe said she
saw when Oz was on the bus.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=138183
> There
> are also memos written by the cops who searched his room in which they
> described the shirt and trousers that they recovered.
The shirt found in his drawer was CE 151, the one that can be seen
in the link I gave above.
> All of the evidence indicates that Lee Oswald was NOT the man with the
> rifle who was dressed in the white clothing.
Only when you ignore all the evidence that indicates it was Oz
firing from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
<SNIP>
Bud
These lessons aren`t for you or Walt, you are out of the reach of
reason. You clapped like a circus seal just because Walt posted
Doughtery`s testimony, what killer point did you think he was making
by doing that? You`re better off just lurking, stoner, Sammy Brown
might feel the need for a light workout, and pummel your sorry ass
again.
dcwi...@netscape.net
Oh! Flash! Last-minute update: Tuesday's make-believe shooting
suspect: LHO
dcwi...@netscape.net
> gave of him wasn`t a perfect one.
>
> > Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> > standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> > be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> > Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> > man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
>
> Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
> about what the witnesses say?
>
> > which they all
> > described as being white,
>
> Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
>
> > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
>
> Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
>
recollecting:
Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
Couldn't get more specific than that about a collar....
dw
> > The
> > collar was open at the neck,
>
> Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
> necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
Bud, Bud--"opened at COLLAR"!
According to the cabbie Whaley, O was wearing a *jacket or two*. If
so, how could anyone see a hole in a shirt sleeve? No one said O was
*carrying* any clothes, such as jackets.
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId...
>
> > There
> > are also memos written by the cops who searched his room in which they
> > described the shirt and trousers that they recovered.
>
> The shirt found in his drawer was CE 151, the one that can be seen
> in the link I gave above.
>
> > All of the evidence indicates that Lee Oswald was NOT the man with the
> > rifle who was dressed in the white clothing.
>
> Only when you ignore all the evidence that indicates it was Oz
> firing from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
>
Like the hulls which Capn Fritz pocketed *before* they were
photographed. Har har har! Like the *aiming* box on the sill which
was supposedly occupying the same space as the suspect (according to
Brennan) in the minutes before shooting. Har!
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
dcwi...@netscape.net
shirt or jacket! O, quick-change artist!
dw
> Oz was wearing this t-shirt when arrested...
>
> http://rotten.com/library/bio/crime/assassins/lee-harvey-oswald/oswal...
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
Bud
That is why I said that there is conflicting information. I don`t
state as fact that Oz was wearing only the white t-shirt as the time
of the assassination. Walt states as fact that Oz was wearing the
brown shirt. Baker tried to distance himself from the clothing
description he gave, and he did see Oz later at the police station,
possibly with his brown shirt on, so that could be where that
impression came from. In any case, it`s the kooks who try to pretend
mush is solid stuff, clothing descriptions, time estimations,ect.
Bud
dcwi...@netscape.net wrote:
> On Mar 31, 7:27 pm, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Walt wrote:
> SNIP
> > gave of him wasn`t a perfect one.
> >
> > > Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> > > standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> > > be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> > > Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> > > man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
> >
> > Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
> > about what the witnesses say?
> >
> > > which they all
> > > described as being white,
> >
> > Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
> >
> > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
> >
> > Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> > have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
> >
> Walt is not lying.
Yah, he is, unless they all said what he claimed they had all said.
> Let's do a direct quote instead of just
> recollecting:
> Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
> slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
> Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
But in his affidavit of the 22nd, he said he could only see the
man`s head.
> Couldn't get more specific than that about a collar....
Sure you could. This doesn`t establish whether he was claiming to
have seen actual folded down material, or using "collar" to designate
an area on a shirt.
Walt
I asked you to name the witness......obviously you can't, because
you're a liar.
>
> > > > > > In fact the
> > > > > > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > > > > > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > > > > > insanity.
>
> > > > > Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
>
> > > > Wow!!... What a gross oversimplification of the IMAGINED event!!
>
> > > Well, kook conjecture might have him repelling down the side of the
> > > building, but I think the stairs are a more likely.
>
> > > > Surely you can do better than this insipid display.....
>
> > > Being an LN means I have to entertain the simple solutions first.
> > > You kooks leap right over the mundane, to the fantastic.
Translation.....I'm so much smarter than you simpleton peasants that I
can offer you simplistic solutions and you'll swallow them like a
starving coyote that caught a mouse.
One witness who saw Oswald as he walked through the room on the second
floor as he left the building said he was wearing a T-shirt.....and he
was.... BUT he had a brown shirt on over the T-shirt. DPD officer
Baker had seen Oswald just seconds before Mrs Reid saw him and Baker
said he had on a brown shirt or jacket. Baker's description could
also be interpreted to fit what Mrs Reid said.......ie The argument
could be made that the shirt Oswald was wearing was white, and he had
a brown jacket on also. Therefore Mrs Reid could have mentioned the
color of the T-shirt and ignored the jacket. As you point out Oswald
apparently often worked in his T-shirt on warm days, so Mrs Reid may
have saw him in her mind as wearing a T-Shirt.
Any way you slice it your use of Mrs Reid's statement is very
weak..... She's the only witness who knew Oswald by sight who said he
was wearing a white shirt, and as I just pointed out she could have
been mistaken.
>
> > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described the mans shirt as.." a
> > very light color, probably white, open at the collar. and he was
> > wearing a T- shirt beneath that light colored sport shirt.
>
> <snicker> They all said the exact same thing, eh? Rowland, in his
> afidavit said the man he saw was wearing a "light-colored shirt, open
> at neck". Edwards told the WC that the man was wearing :light colored
> shirt, short sleeve and open neck". His affidavit said "yellow or
> white shirt". Fischer told the WC "And he had-- he had on an open neck
> shirt, but it-- uh-- could have been a sport shirt or a t-shirt. It
> was light in color, possibly white".
>
> Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the shots, said "What he was
> wearing, he had on a white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers".
>
> Oz was wearing this t-shirt when arrested...
That's true....he was also wearing his briefs... So what? He had a
gray shirt on over the T-shirt, and Dark trousers on over his
briefs.....
>
> http://rotten.com/library/bio/crime/assassins/lee-harvey-oswald/oswal...
>
> > So your
> > argument about the guy wearing only a T-shirt is just plain dumb.
>
> Even though one of the witnesses you names said it could have been
> a t-shirt the man was wearing?
Not quite ..... Ronald Fischer said the man he saw on the sixth floor
was wearing "an open neck shirt, that could have been a sport
shirt"... OR OR OR a T-shirt. That tiny little word"or" means
that his first impression was that the shirt was a sport shirt. And
that is corroborated by both Ronald Fischer and Arnold Rowland who
described a light colored sport shirt.
>
> > It's nothing but a desperate attempt of an egotistical snob grasping
> > at straws to save face.
>
> Why didn`t you include all the parts of the descriptions that are a
> close fit to Oz, the brown hair, 22-24 year old, slender descriptions
> these men gave?
because we are discussing the mans CLOTHING..... Once I shove the FACT
that the killer was wearing white clothes up yer ass then we can move
on to physical characteristics.
>
> > You simply don't want to admit that you "Mr
> > I'm superior Bud" have been suckered by charlatans just as Oswald was
> > suckered.
>
> You simply shouldn`t be looking into this case at all. You don`t
> have the barest necessities for reasoned analysis.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > and Oswald was
> > > > > > wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
>
> > > > > So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
>
> > > > No there isn't any real conflicting information ....... I know that
> > > > you've attempted to say Charles Givens said Oswald was wearing green
> > > > that day.....
>
> > > No, Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the assassination, said he
> > > was wearing a white t-shirt. This represents conflicting information
> > > as to what Oz was wearing at the time.
>
> > > > but November 22 is not St Paddy's day, and I believe it
> > > > was later learned that Givens was color blind.
>
> > > A color blind person wouldn`t offer colors, would he? He`d just say
> > > "I can`t tell you what color his clothes are, I`m color blind".
>
> > > > > > So who could that gunman
> > > > > > have been??
>
> > > > > Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
No it could NOT have been Oswald.... that's the point I'm hammering
through yer thick skull in this post.
>
> > > > > > Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty?
>
> > > > > Anybody but your precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
>
> > > > Naw....Mrs Reid had a couple of didtinguishing features that precluded
> > > > her as being the WHITE CLOTHING clad gun MAN.
>
> > > Couldn`t she have been flat chested?
>
> > > > > > He admitted that he was
> > > > > > on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
>
> > > > > He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
> > > > > that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
> > > > > luckily he was able to clear himself also.
>
> > > > Nobody verified that he was on the fifth floor when the shots were
> > > > fired.....
>
> > > Or that he was on the sixth. You inadvertently made my point.
>
> > > > Just because he said that, doesn't make it a fact.
>
> > > Yet you accept him saying he was on the sixth as solid information.
>
> > When you're dealing with a liar....that's the way it is. That's
> > exactly why I posted his testimony, so we can debate the points that
> > are conflicting.
>
> You need me to take you by the hand, and point out all the
> contradictions?
Yes.....Let's do that step by step....
Perhaps we can find the FBI report and see exactly what the FBI agent
recorded.
>
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Lie?? I've told you before...Only a damned fool would lie if he
truely is seeking the truth. The truth does not need to be supported
by a single lie..... The truth will stand alone, without any
propping.
You asked me to show you where any of them used the word "very"... Ok,
here it is.....
Mr. Rowland.
He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it
was unbuttoned about halfway, and then he had a regular T-shirt, a
polo shirt under this, at least this is what it appeared to be.
He ( the man on the sixth floor) had on a light shirt, a very light-
colored shirt, .... A VERY LIGHT COLORED SHIRT......
If you have a problem understanding that statement ask any third
grader to interpret it for you.
Walt
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId...
>
> > There
> > are also memos written by the cops who searched his room in which they
> > described the shirt and trousers that they recovered.
>
> The shirt found in his drawer was CE 151, the one that can be seen
> in the link I gave above.
>
> > All of the evidence indicates that Lee Oswald was NOT the man with the
> > rifle who was dressed in the white clothing.
>
> Only when you ignore all the evidence that indicates it was Oz
> firing from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
>
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
Bud
No, you`re an idiot. After years of looking at this case, you are
unaware that someone said they saw Oz shooting towards the limo. If
you can`t get the simpiliest things right, how can we move on to more
complex issues?
> > > > > > > In fact the
> > > > > > > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > > > > > > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > > > > > > insanity.
> >
> > > > > > Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
> >
> > > > > Wow!!... What a gross oversimplification of the IMAGINED event!!
> >
> > > > Well, kook conjecture might have him repelling down the side of the
> > > > building, but I think the stairs are a more likely.
> >
> > > > > Surely you can do better than this insipid display.....
> >
> > > > Being an LN means I have to entertain the simple solutions first.
> > > > You kooks leap right over the mundane, to the fantastic.
>
> Translation.....I'm so much smarter than you simpleton peasants that I
> can offer you simplistic solutions and you'll swallow them like a
> starving coyote that caught a mouse.
<snicker> Yah, Baker didn`t just respond spontaneously to the
assassination, he was told by dark forces what was going to go down,
and his role was to dart into TSBD and kill Oz, but Truly presence
thwarted the plan. I doubt you could get a starving coyote to choke
that down, but you swallow it whole and ask for dessert. We are not
looking at a difference in intellegence, we are looking at sane versus
insane.
Thats like describing his socks without mentioning his shoes.
Again, what she said was "What he was wearing, he had on a white t-
shirt and some kind of wash trousers." Do you want to assume he was
wearing a football helmet she didn`t mention?
> DPD officer
> Baker had seen Oswald just seconds before Mrs Reid saw him and Baker
> said he had on a brown shirt or jacket.
Yah, but Baker probably had a lot more on his mind at the time than
Reid, who wasn`t hunting for a shooter.
> Baker's description could
> also be interpreted to fit what Mrs Reid said......
By a retard unfamiliar with the English language.
>.ie The argument
> could be made that the shirt Oswald was wearing was white, and he had
> a brown jacket on also.
Or that Oz was the person Baker, Edwars, Brennan and Rowland saw
(as much of the descriptive terms used by these men match Oswald) on
the 6th floor of the TSBD around the time of the shooting.
> Therefore Mrs Reid could have mentioned the
> color of the T-shirt and ignored the jacket.
Maybe Oz was wearing a pope hat that she neglected to mention also.
You can`t put clothes on Oz that the witness doesn`t mention, you are
stuck with what they say.
> As you point out Oswald
> apparently often worked in his T-shirt on warm days, so Mrs Reid may
> have saw him in her mind as wearing a T-Shirt.
And Baker`s description could have been influenced by see Oz at the
police station.
> Any way you slice it your use of Mrs Reid's statement is very
> weak.....
Is it? Why? What about the coke she said Oz was carrying?
Unreliable information there too?
> She's the only witness who knew Oswald by sight who said he
> was wearing a white shirt, and as I just pointed out she could have
> been mistaken.
As could Baker.
> > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described the mans shirt as.." a
> > > very light color, probably white, open at the collar. and he was
> > > wearing a T- shirt beneath that light colored sport shirt.
> >
> > <snicker> They all said the exact same thing, eh? Rowland, in his
> > afidavit said the man he saw was wearing a "light-colored shirt, open
> > at neck". Edwards told the WC that the man was wearing :light colored
> > shirt, short sleeve and open neck". His affidavit said "yellow or
> > white shirt". Fischer told the WC "And he had-- he had on an open neck
> > shirt, but it-- uh-- could have been a sport shirt or a t-shirt. It
> > was light in color, possibly white".
> >
> > Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the shots, said "What he was
> > wearing, he had on a white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers".
> >
> > Oz was wearing this t-shirt when arrested...
>
> That's true....he was also wearing his briefs... So what? He had a
> gray shirt on over the T-shirt, and Dark trousers on over his
> briefs.....
There is someone who worked with Oz who said he often worked in his
t-shirt. Do you have someone who said he worked in his briefs? Outer
shirts are easily put on and taken off, they aren`t stitched to the
skin.
> > http://rotten.com/library/bio/crime/assassins/lee-harvey-oswald/oswal...
> >
> > > So your
> > > argument about the guy wearing only a T-shirt is just plain dumb.
> >
> > Even though one of the witnesses you names said it could have been
> > a t-shirt the man was wearing?
>
> Not quite ..... Ronald Fischer said the man he saw on the sixth floor
> was wearing "an open neck shirt, that could have been a sport
> shirt"... OR OR OR a T-shirt.
Yah, see, he specifically mentions a t-shirt. So why did you declare
it "dumb" that the man he saw was wearing a t-shirt?
> That tiny little word"or" means
> that his first impression was that the shirt was a sport shirt.
Of course this isn`t true. It means he is listing what he considers
to be the possibilities. So, since he mentioned a t-shirt as a
possibility, how can that possibility be considered "dumb"? Wouldn`t
that word apply to you for calling the possibility of a t-shirt
"dumb"?
> And
> that is corroborated by both Ronald Fischer and Arnold Rowland who
> described a light colored sport shirt.
Quote Rowland calling it a "sport shirt". I only find him calling
it a shirt. And Fischer, in his affidavit, said he could only see the
man`s head. The fact is, only Rowland and Brennan had a particular
reason to take a real look at Oz, Edwards and Fischer were just
casually scanning people and thought Oz looked peculiar. They had no
real reason to note the clothing Oz was wearing.
> > > It's nothing but a desperate attempt of an egotistical snob grasping
> > > at straws to save face.
> >
> > Why didn`t you include all the parts of the descriptions that are a
> > close fit to Oz, the brown hair, 22-24 year old, slender descriptions
> > these men gave?
>
> because we are discussing the mans CLOTHING.....
No, we are discussing whether it was Oz these men saw. You are
emphasizing clothing, but have thrown in physical desciptions as well.
> Once I shove the FACT
> that the killer was wearing white clothes up yer ass then we can move
> on to physical characteristics.
So far, you`ve only succeeded in making it more obvious that it was
Oz they saw. The white shirt Oz was wearing generally matches the
white shirt the witnesses describe the man on the 6th floor wearing.
> > > You simply don't want to admit that you "Mr
> > > I'm superior Bud" have been suckered by charlatans just as Oswald was
> > > suckered.
> >
> > You simply shouldn`t be looking into this case at all. You don`t
> > have the barest necessities for reasoned analysis.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > and Oswald was
> > > > > > > wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
> >
> > > > > > So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
> >
> > > > > No there isn't any real conflicting information ....... I know that
> > > > > you've attempted to say Charles Givens said Oswald was wearing green
> > > > > that day.....
> >
> > > > No, Mrs Reid, who saw Oz shortly after the assassination, said he
> > > > was wearing a white t-shirt. This represents conflicting information
> > > > as to what Oz was wearing at the time.
> >
> > > > > but November 22 is not St Paddy's day, and I believe it
> > > > > was later learned that Givens was color blind.
> >
> > > > A color blind person wouldn`t offer colors, would he? He`d just say
> > > > "I can`t tell you what color his clothes are, I`m color blind".
> >
> > > > > > > So who could that gunman
> > > > > > > have been??
> >
> > > > > > Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
>
> No it could NOT have been Oswald....
<snicker> Yah, I know your position, he had to be anybody eles on
the planet but your precious patsy.
> that's the point I'm hammering
> through yer thick skull in this post.
Perhaps you would do better by giving good reasons to rule Oz out as
the person seen.
> > > > > > > Could that gunman have been Jack Dougherty?
> >
> > > > > > Anybody but your precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
> >
> > > > > Naw....Mrs Reid had a couple of didtinguishing features that precluded
> > > > > her as being the WHITE CLOTHING clad gun MAN.
> >
> > > > Couldn`t she have been flat chested?
> >
> > > > > > > He admitted that he was
> > > > > > > on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
> >
> > > > > > He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
> > > > > > that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
> > > > > > luckily he was able to clear himself also.
> >
> > > > > Nobody verified that he was on the fifth floor when the shots were
> > > > > fired.....
> >
> > > > Or that he was on the sixth. You inadvertently made my point.
> >
> > > > > Just because he said that, doesn't make it a fact.
> >
> > > > Yet you accept him saying he was on the sixth as solid information.
> >
> > > When you're dealing with a liar....that's the way it is. That's
> > > exactly why I posted his testimony, so we can debate the points that
> > > are conflicting.
> >
> > You need me to take you by the hand, and point out all the
> > contradictions?
>
> Yes.....Let's do that step by step....
Not interested, I have no theories about what Doughtery said. He
seems a slightly addled type of guy, and I don`t see where anything he
relates sheds light on the slightest aspect of this case.
Perhaps. I`d be interested in seeeing the FBI reports on a lot of
these witnesses. Are the available online?
Bud
<SNIP>
> > > Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> > > standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> > > be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> > > Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> > > man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
> >
> Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
> about what the witnesses say?
>
> Lie?? I've told you before...Only a damned fool would lie if he
> truely is seeking the truth. The truth does not need to be supported
> by a single lie..... The truth will stand alone, without any
> propping.
>
> You asked me to show you where any of them used the word "very"... Ok,
> here it is.....
>
> Mr. Rowland.
> He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
> blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it
> was unbuttoned about halfway, and then he had a regular T-shirt, a
> polo shirt under this, at least this is what it appeared to be.
>
> He ( the man on the sixth floor) had on a light shirt, a very light-
> colored shirt, .... A VERY LIGHT COLORED SHIRT......
Very good, you produced one of the four men you named using the
word "very", I doubted you could do even that. Now, you only need to
quote the other three men you named using that word.
> If you have a problem understanding that statement ask any third
> grader to interpret it for you.
I think most third graders understand the meaning of the word
"all".
> Walt
<SNIP>
Walt
Is this an admission that I did not lie?? If so don't you think an
apology is in order?
You might say...." I'm sorry I called you a liar, Walt... I lied and
tried to make you out to be the liar, in my arrogance I thought I was
superior to you and could get away with lting just like the Warren
Commission did."
Are you man enough, Dud?.....
Walt
>
> > If you have a problem understanding that statement ask any third
> > grader to interpret it for you.
>
> I think most third graders understand the meaning of the word
> "all".
>
> > Walt
>
dcwi...@netscape.net
> dcwill...@netscape.net wrote:
> > On Mar 31, 7:27 pm, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > Walt wrote:
> > SNIP
> > > gave of him wasn`t a perfect one.
>
> > > > Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> > > > standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> > > > be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> > > > Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> > > > man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
>
> > > Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
> > > about what the witnesses say?
>
> > > > which they all
> > > > described as being white,
>
> > > Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
>
> > > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > > > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
>
> > > Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> > > have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
>
> > Walt is not lying.
>
> Yah, he is, unless they all said what he claimed they had all said.
>
specified witness.
dw
> > Let's do a direct quote instead of just
> > recollecting:
> > Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
> > slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
> > Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
>
> But in his affidavit of the 22nd, he said he could only see the
> man`s head.
>
Not the point. Walt wasn't lying about Fischer--he was referencing
another source. And no one has ever reconciled Fischer's various
statements--in the Lewis report, Fischer notes shirt *and* slacks!
> > Couldn't get more specific than that about a collar....
>
> Sure you could. This doesn`t establish whether he was claiming to
> have seen actual folded down material, or using "collar" to designate
> an area on a shirt.
>
And McA sez *CTers* are picky! How would a "sport shirt" be
"opened"? Oh, yes, yes--the guy could have cut open an area of the
shirt with a pair of scissors. That's certainly possible....
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
dcwi...@netscape.net
who saw a suspect in light-colored clothing hanging out a corner
window--the Weaver Polaroid. So these witnesses were correct....
dw
To wit: Brennan, Fischer, Edwards & Mrs Walther
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
some of these "dud's" demand lawyer like foundation regarding any CT
comment ref the WCR/evidence -- they also run like hell when one
quotes or comments from Mark Lane's, Rush to Judgement --- these
Nutter guy's are a fucking **HOOT** (hoot ole Steve Keating term)
Walt
I'll admit that I'm not aware of ANYBODY who saw Oswald firing a rifle
from that SE corner window, Nor am I aware of anybody reporting that
they saw Oswald in any of the sixth floor windows at the time of the
shooting or minutes before the shooting. DPD Chief Curry was also
unaware that any witness had reported seeing Oswald in any of the
windows on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
Perhaps you can give us the name of the witness who knew oswald by
sight who said he/she had seen Oswald in any window on the sixth floor
at the time of the shooting.
Walt
Mrs. Reid.
Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back
door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several
feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but
maybe they didn't hit him."
He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too. I didn't pay
any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts of anything of
him having any connection with it at all because he was very calm. He
had gotten a coke and was holding it in his hands and I guess the
reason it impressed me seeing him in there I thought it was a little
strange that one of -the warehouse boys would be up in the office at
the time, not that he had done anything wrong. The only time I had
seen him in the office was to come and get change and he already had
his coke in his hand so he didn't come for change and I dismissed him.
I didn't think anything else.
I didn't pay any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts
of anything of him having any connection with it at all because he was
very calm.
I believe that Baker also described Oswald in a manner very much like
Mrs Reid.......
Do you believe that Oswald was such a good actor that he could commit
the crime of the century by killing the President of the United States
and show no emotional signs of his deed??
Walt
> to be the possibilities. So, since he mentioned ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Bud
No. You said they "all saw the man that was dressed in a very light
collored shirt". To line them all up behind that assertion, you need
to produce statements from all of them saying it, not one. I asked for
one, but one doesn`t make what you said true.
> You might say...." I'm sorry I called you a liar, Walt... I lied and
> tried to make you out to be the liar, in my arrogance I thought I was
> superior to you and could get away with lting just like the Warren
> Commission did."
What you said wasn`t true. You should have known it when you said
it. You play fast and loose with the testimony, if you want to say
they all asserted the same thing, back it up, don`t lump them all
together under something only one of them said.
> Are you man enough, Dud?.....
If what you said turned out to be true, I would have no trouble
apologizing. But, I`m pretty careful about what I call a lie, I do it
when I am just about positive what you said is one (but there may be
sources I am unaware of that I didn`t check). I wasn`t wrong here.
But, you will notice that I never stated you couldn`t produce one of
the men using the word "very". I only challenged you to do it.
Walt
Dud, You are now showing that not only are you liar, but you're also a
coward and an asshole.
Walt
>
>
>
> > Walt
>
> > > > If you have a problem understanding that statement ask any third
> > > > grader to interpret it for you.
>
> > > I think most third graders understand the meaning of the word
> > > "all".
>
> > > > Walt
>
> > > <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Read what I was calling a lie. It was specifically about Walt
claiming they all said the same thing. Follow the discussion or stay
out of it. The Fischer point was a point made aside from the issue
Walt was lying about.
> > > Let's do a direct quote instead of just
> > > recollecting:
> > > Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
> > > slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
> > > Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
> >
> > But in his affidavit of the 22nd, he said he could only see the
> > man`s head.
> >
> Not the point. Walt wasn't lying about Fischer--he was referencing
> another source. And no one has ever reconciled Fischer's various
> statements--in the Lewis report, Fischer notes shirt *and* slacks!
Walt was lying because he said all these men attested to the same
thing. You can`t claim all Three Stooges are bald because Curly is.
Walt does this kind of fudging with witness testimony all the time.
I`m going to start calling him more closely on it. This are not
mistakes, it is phrasing the information dishonestly to make his
position seem stronger than it really is. Either he`ll be more careful
with his assertions, or he`ll be called a liar a lot.
> > > Couldn't get more specific than that about a collar....
> >
> > Sure you could. This doesn`t establish whether he was claiming to
> > have seen actual folded down material, or using "collar" to designate
> > an area on a shirt.
> >
> And McA sez *CTers* are picky! How would a "sport shirt" be
> "opened"? Oh, yes, yes--the guy could have cut open an area of the
> shirt with a pair of scissors. That's certainly possible....
I don`t expect these witnesses to note specific details on people
they saw while casually observing their surroundongs (Brennan prior to
the shooting, anyway, plus Fischer and Edwards. Rowland was the only
one prior to the shooting to have reason to scrutinize the man on the
6th floor he saw). If Fischer can`t be sure whether it was a t-shirt
or sports shirt he was looking at, just how much detail did he note?
How much of what these witnesses relate is a positive assertion, that
they are relating details that they are sure of (and even if they did
say they were sure of a detail, that wouldn`t make that detail a
positive thing)? they are relating impressions, the usual mush kooks
try to spin into concrete.
In any case, a v-necked t-shirt could be referred to as open at the
collar, even though the shirt has no real collar. It`s an area as much
as a clothing feature. Put it this way, if the limo had a solid area
in back instead of a real trunk, wouldn`t the witnesses still say
Jackie climbed out onto the trunk? They wouldn`t say "Jackie climbed
out onto the are where a trunk would be if the limo had a trunk".
> > > dw
<SNIP>
Bud
More is the pity. Maybe a few more decades looking into this case
will cause the name to break the surface of your consiousness.
> DPD Chief Curry was also
> unaware that any witness had reported seeing Oswald in any of the
> windows on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
Why do you say he is unaware of Brennan, do you think Curry was
unfamiliar with the case and it`s witnesses?
> Perhaps you can give us the name of the witness who knew oswald by
> sight who said he/she had seen Oswald in any window on the sixth floor
> at the time of the shooting.
Brennan said he recognized Oswald as the man he saw shooting from
the TSBD. Mental blocks and reading comprehension problems prevent you
from discerning that from his testimony.
Bud
<SNIP>
I missed this, may as well adress it...
I don`t know that I can speak intelligently about Oz`s acting
ability. I don`t think you can either, which is why you will. But, do
you think it is a normal reaction to be calm when you hear the
shocking news of the President being shot outside your building, and
having a policeman point a gun at you? And then he leaves work, and
gets on a bus, and Mrs Bledsoe describes him as "He looks like a
maniac". So, in situations you`d expect him to be anxious and excited,
he looks calm, and in situations he has no reason to be excited, he
looks like a maniac. Pretty suspicious, right? And then, when entering
the Texas Theater, the tickettaker, Mrs Postal, had this to say about
Oz`s demeanor... "Yes, and when the sirens went by he had a panicked
look on his face, and he ducked in". I suppose that could be
attributed to his fear of getting caught trying to sneak in without
paying, but Postal seems to associate it more with the police
activity.
> Walt
>
<SNIP>
Walt
Huh?..... When did Baker say he saw anybody who looked even remotely
similar to Oswald on the sixth floor ??
>
> > Therefore Mrs Reid could have mentioned the
> > color of the T-shirt and ignored the jacket.
>
> Maybe Oz was wearing a pope hat that she neglected to mention also.
> You can`t put clothes on Oz that the witness doesn`t mention, you are
> stuck with what they say.
>
> > As you point out Oswald
> > apparently often worked in his T-shirt on warm days, so Mrs Reid may
> > have saw him in her mind as wearing a T-Shirt.
>
> And Baker`s description could have been influenced by see Oz at the
> police station.
>
> > Any way you slice it your use of Mrs Reid's statement is very
> > weak.....
>
> Is it? Why? What about the coke she said Oz was carrying?
> Unreliable information there too?
>
> > She's the only witness who knew Oswald by sight who said he
> > was wearing a white shirt, and as I just pointed out she could have
> > been mistaken.
Mrs. Reid.
Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back
door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several
feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but
maybe they didn't hit him."
He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too. I didn't pay
any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts of anything of
him having any connection with it at all because he was very calm. He
had gotten a coke and was holding it in his hands and I guess the
reason it impressed me seeing him in there I thought it was a little
strange that one of -the warehouse boys would be up in the office at
the time, not that he had done anything wrong. The only time I had
seen him in the office was to come and get change and he already had
his coke in his hand so he didn't come for change and I dismissed him.
I didn't think anything else.
I didn't pay any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts
of anything of him having any connection with it at all because he was
very calm.
Mr. Belin.
And when in Dallas, we started the stopwatch from the time that the
last shot was fired, is that correct?
Mrs. Reid.
That is right.
Mr. Belin.
And then you went through your actions, what you saw, your
conversations that you had, and your actions in going back into the
building and up to the point that you saw Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mrs. Reid.
That is right.
Mr. Belin.
Do you remember how long by the stopwatch it took you?
Mrs. Reid.
Approximately 2 minutes.
Mr. Belin.
>From the time of the last shot the time you and Oswald crossed?
Mrs Reid
Yes
This is an interesting bit of information.
Mrs Reid said they timed the action she took on the day of the murder.
They found that two minutes lapsed between the last shot and the point
where she and Oswald passed each other on the second floor of the
TSBD. She said that as she arrived on the second floor she saw Oswald
entering the Clerical area. She said "I kept walking and I looked up
and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office." It's obvious
that they have not yet passed each other ( two minutes after the last
shot) when she first saw Oswald entering the backside of the room.
I'd say she first saw Oswald at about 1 1/2 to 1 3/4 minutes after the
last shot. Since Oswald it's reasonable to assume at least 30
seconds passed ( and it may have been more) after Baker and Truly
encountered Oswald in the lunch room, that would mean that Baker
encountered Oswald in the Lunchroom only about 1 minute after the last
shot. Even the W.C. would have had to admit that was no way that
Oswald could have been the gunman on the sixth floor if he was seen in
the Lunchroom just one minute after the last shot.
Walt
> to be the possibilities. So, since he mentioned ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Walt
WHOA!! Whoa there you dumb sumbitch!! Whoa..........Now you/ve got
the goddamned cart before the horse...
You have to assume that Oswald knew that the president had been shot
when Baker encountered him in the Lunchroom. Oswald's actions
indicate that he DID NOT know that JFK had been shot when Baker And
Truly saw him in the lunchroom. Chances are he never even heard the
shots in the enclosed lunchroom in the back of the building. His
countenance when Baker pointed his revolver at him was one of
surprise, and bewilderment. There isn't a shred of evidence that
Baker told Oswald that the president had been shot, in fact Baker
could not have told Oswald that JFK had been shot, because he simply
didn't know that at the time he entered the TSBD. All he knew is that
it appeared that someone had fired a rifle from the top of the TSBD
when he entered the building.
You have absolutely no proof that Oswald knew that JFK had been shot
when he met Mrs Reid on his way to the front door of the TSBD. You may
"believe" he knew that JFK had been shot, but I don't share your
belief.
I believe that oswald didn't know that there had been a shooting until
he got outside and heard the spectators talking about it. Even at
that point he didn't know that JFK had actually been hit by the
gunfire.
And then he leaves work, and
> gets on a bus, and Mrs Bledsoe describes him as "He looks like a
> maniac".
Oswald looked calm and unruffled when Baker and truly saw him in the
luncroom. He looked calm and unruffled when he passed Mrs Reid on the
second floor. But When he got on Mc watters Bus Mrs Bledsoe said he
looked like a maniac...
What happened between the time that Mrs Reid saw him and the time Mrs
Bledsoe saw him? Answer.... He learned that somebody had shot
president Kennedy.
The FACT that he was calm and cool when he left the TSBD but very
upset when Mrs Bledsoe saw him on the bus is a very strong indication
that He knew nothing about the shooting until he reached the street
outside of the TSBD.
So, in situations you`d expect him to be anxious and excited,
> he looks calm, and in situations he has no reason to be excited, he
> looks like a maniac. Pretty suspicious, right?
Is that the view you get when you have yer head in yer ass?
And then, when entering
> the Texas Theater, the tickettaker, Mrs Postal, had this to say about
> Oz`s demeanor... "Yes, and when the sirens went by he had a panicked
> look on his face, and he ducked in". I suppose that could be
> attributed to his fear of getting caught trying to sneak in without
> paying, but Postal seems to associate it more with the police
> activity.
Julia Postal didn't see anybody enter the theater.......She was
standing on the curb and distracted by the police cars racing west on
Jefferson.
Johnny Brewer asked her if she knew a man had entered the theater
while her back was to the door of the theater.
>
> > Walt
>
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Don.... Do you know where Dud gets the idea that Lee was wearing a Vee
necked T-shirt? I've looked at several photos of Oswald in custody
and most of them show that he is wearinf a standard round necked T-
shirt. There is one photo that shows the neck is stretched and it
looks a little like a Vee necked shirt but it is not. I suspect that
the cops were jerking him around and man handling him by his clothes
so that explains the stretched neck on the T-shirt. Unless there is
a photo that shows Lee wearing a Vee necked shirt...I'll just assume
that Dud has lied once again.
Walt
David Von Pein
I couldn't disagree more strongly.
Oswald wasn't the slightest bit surprised to see Baker's gun pointed
at him. And Oswald never said a word, such as: "WTF is this? Why are
you holding a gun on me?!"
The reason he wasn't surprised? -- He expected the cops to show up
fast. How could he NOT have expected them? Oz just fired three loud
shots from upstairs, therefore he KNEW the place would be crawling
with police really quick.
His non-surprised reaction is more indicative of guilt than innocence,
IMO. For example, if you were innocent of all wrong-doing and had a
cop rush at you with a gun....wouldn't you be a bit surprised and want
to know what's going on?
And Oswald's leaving the building within a minute of his Baker
encounter also reeks of guilt...in fact, even more so due to his Baker
encounter. Oz has a gun shoved in his gut and then hears Reid tell him
"The President's been shot" as he strolls through the 2nd-Floor
office.....and then what does Oz decide he wants to do? He decides he
wants to leave this exciting scene of action and go to a movie in Oak
Cliff (and sneak into the theater without paying, to boot)!!
Yeah, that makes sense.
<laugh>
>>> "His countenance when Baker pointed his revolver at him was one of surprise and bewilderment." <<<
Why are you saying this? His reaction was exactly the
opposite....i.e., calm, cool, not surprised at seeing Baker or his gun
at all (per Baker and Truly).
>>> "You have absolutely no proof that Oswald knew that JFK had been shot when he met Reid on his way to the front door of the TSBD." <<<
Other than the fact that his gun and shells and prints and paper bag
(with still more prints on it) are upstairs in the Sniper's Nest,
where people saw Oswald or an Oswald look-alike shooting at JFK --
that's all.
Oh....and the fact that Mrs. Reid TOLD Oswald "The President's been
shot".
>>> "You may "believe" he knew that JFK had been shot, but I don't share your belief." <<<
That's because you're a kook.
>>> "I believe that Oswald didn't know that there had been a shooting until he got outside and heard the spectators talking about it." <<<
Goodie, goodie. More purely made-up kookshit from Walt. Surprise!
And via this theory, I guess you think Oswald didn't hear a word of
Reid's "The President's been shot" statement as Oz walked by...right?
But Oswald "mumbled something" to Reid just after she told him about
the President being shot (per Reid's WC testimony), as if he was
acknowledging what she had just said (at least in a sense, albeit via
only a "mumble").
>>> "Oswald looked calm and unruffled when Baker and Truly saw him in the lunchroom." <<<
I thought just a second ago you said Oswald looked "surprised and
bewildered"? Is that supposed to be the same thing as "calm and
unruffled"?
>>> "But when he got on McWatters' bus, Mrs. Bledsoe said he looked like a maniac. What happened between the time that Reid saw him and the time Bledsoe saw him?" <<<
Oswald's main concern at the TSBD, of course, was to NOT LET ON HE HAD
JUST SHOT THE PRESIDENT -- so, naturally, he tried to put on the best
"act" he could until he was able to get away from the immediate crime
scene.
And his act worked perfectly too, as he was cleared by Truly as just
another Depository employee, which enabled him to get away from Baker
and out of the building unchallenged.
I take Bledsoe's testimony with a large granule of salt, and the
"maniac" reference I've always thought of as a sort of COMBINATION of
how Oz really looked and Bledsoe's inner feelings of dislike for this
guy she had kicked out of her lodgings the previous month.
Bledsoe also stated she barely even looked at him at all on the bus.
Once she realized it was Oswald, she avoided looking at him at all,
mainly because she didn't want HIM to see HER. So she couldn't have
noticed TOO much about his appearance if she only saw him as he
initially got on the bus.
But the key point to be made re. Bledsoe is -- We know it had to be
Oswald on that bus because Bledsoe KNEW HIM ON SIGHT. She had no doubt
it was Oz, because she remembered him from the previous month when he
rented a room from her.
And the fact that she wanted to keep him from seeing her on the bus is
also a strong indication that the man she was TRYING TO AVOID was,
indeed, the man she refused to continue to rent a room to and was a
person she had a REASON TO REMEMBER.
These things re. Bledsoe are also additional reasons to rake Mark Lane
over the coals re. this "bus" matter. In Lane's film, he hints that
Oswald possibly wasn't on McWatters' bus at all...but Lane never ONCE
mentions the BEST witness to Oswald having been on the bus -- Mary
Bledsoe.
Bud
I don`t have to. But I do.
> Oswald's actions
> indicate that he DID NOT know that JFK had been shot when Baker And
> Truly saw him in the lunchroom.
Then you still have an abnormal lack of curiosity about having a gun
ponited at him. Wouldn`t you ask what it was all about?
> Chances are he never even heard the
> shots in the enclosed lunchroom in the back of the building.
Likely his ears were still ringing from the shots.
> His
> countenance when Baker pointed his revolver at him was one of
> surprise, and bewilderment.
I thought you said it was "very calm". Now he is surprized and
bewildered. What do you see as the expresion of bewilderment and
surprise, the questions he asked?
> There isn't a shred of evidence that
> Baker told Oswald that the president had been shot, in fact Baker
> could not have told Oswald that JFK had been shot, because he simply
> didn't know that at the time he entered the TSBD.
Truly had an idea the President was hit, I think (don`t feel like
looking it up). But, if you want to contend that no information was
exchanged, then you have Oz`s abnormal lack of curiosity to explain.
> All he knew is that
> it appeared that someone had fired a rifle from the top of the TSBD
> when he entered the building.
> You have absolutely no proof that Oswald knew that JFK had been shot
> when he met Mrs Reid on his way to the front door of the TSBD. You may
> "believe" he knew that JFK had been shot, but I don't share your
> belief.
Mrs Reid said she informed Oz of the President being shot.
> I believe that oswald didn't know that there had been a shooting until
> he got outside and heard the spectators talking about it.
Even though you produced testimony from Mrs Reid saying she told
him. Either you didn`t read what you produced, or read it and ignored
it.
> Even at
> that point he didn't know that JFK had actually been hit by the
> gunfire.
He may have been able to see the spray of blood from the Sniper`s
Nest. Brennan said he detected a look of satisfaction on Oz`s face
before he pulled back into the window.
> >And then he leaves work, and
> > gets on a bus, and Mrs Bledsoe describes him as "He looks like a
> > maniac".
> Oswald looked calm and unruffled when Baker and truly saw him in the
> luncroom. He looked calm and unruffled when he passed Mrs Reid on the
> second floor. But When he got on Mc watters Bus Mrs Bledsoe said he
> looked like a maniac...
>
> What happened between the time that Mrs Reid saw him and the time Mrs
> Bledsoe saw him? Answer.... He learned that somebody had shot
> president Kennedy.
He was so concerned for Kennedy he hung around to find out more?
Or, did he help Roberts with her reception so he could get information
from television? No, he was so concerned, he went to the movies.
> The FACT that he was calm and cool when he left the TSBD but very
> upset when Mrs Bledsoe saw him on the bus is a very strong indication
> that He knew nothing about the shooting until he reached the street
> outside of the TSBD.
Yet, Reid said she told him inside. And why would Oz be distressed
about Kennedy, when you have him so uninterested, he couldn`t be
bothered to look out a window to watch him pass?
> So, in situations you`d expect him to be anxious and excited,
> > he looks calm, and in situations he has no reason to be excited, he
> > looks like a maniac. Pretty suspicious, right?
>
> Is that the view you get when you have yer head in yer ass?
You were representing Oz`s calm demeanor as an indication of Oz`s
innocence. Unusual reactions should be considered suspicious, wouldn`t
you agree?
> And then, when entering
> > the Texas Theater, the tickettaker, Mrs Postal, had this to say about
> > Oz`s demeanor... "Yes, and when the sirens went by he had a panicked
> > look on his face, and he ducked in". I suppose that could be
> > attributed to his fear of getting caught trying to sneak in without
> > paying, but Postal seems to associate it more with the police
> > activity.
>
> Julia Postal didn't see anybody enter the theater.......She was
> standing on the curb and distracted by the police cars racing west on
> Jefferson.
No, she said she was standing out in front of the ticket booth. And
the FACT that she saw Oz sneak in is corroborated by the FACT that he
was found within.
> Johnny Brewer asked her if she knew a man had entered the theater
> while her back was to the door of the theater.
So?
Bud
Yah, thats why I supplied a link to Oz in his t-shirt, so I could
lie about what type of t-shirt he was wearing. I think you are right,
it does appear to be a standard t-shirt, but since Oz`s build is so
*slender* (like many described the man on the 6th floor of the TSBD),
the material around the neck hangs down to make it appear the t-shirt
is a v-neck (at least it did to me). Three picture on the bottom row
of this montage are of Oz after his arrest, and the t-shirt material
around his neck in all three appears "v" shaped.
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g68/almaxp/LHO.jpg
Walt
> >>> "Oswald's actions indicate that he DID NOT know that JFK had been shot when Baker and Truly saw him in the lunchroom." <<<
>
> I couldn't disagree more strongly.
>
> Oswald wasn't the slightest bit surprised to see Baker's gun pointed
> at him. And Oswald never said a word, such as: "WTF is this? Why are
> you holding a gun on me?!"
Riiiiiight..... Is that what you would have done? I doubt it... The
average person would be speechless if he had a cop pointing a gun at
him....That's why I've never believed that Baker had his gun actually
pointed AT Oswald. He may have had his revovler in his hand but that's
not the same as having it "pointed at" Oswald.
>
> The reason he wasn't surprised? --
Oh but he was surprised..... Check the testimony of Roy Truly
He expected the cops to show up
> fast. How could he NOT have expected them? Oz just fired three loud
> shots from upstairs, therefore he KNEW the place would be crawling
> with police really quick.
You are confused There was a 30 to 35 year old, 165 pound, man who was
dressed in white clothes had fired a rifle out of a sixth floor
window. Just seconds after the shots were fired, Baker was
confronting this 24 year old, 140 pound man, dressed in a brown shirt,
a T-shirt, and dark gray trousers.
>
> His non-surprised reaction is more indicative of guilt than innocence,
> IMO. For example, if you were innocent of all wrong-doing and had a
> cop rush at you with a gun....wouldn't you be a bit surprised and want
> to know what's going on?
Absolutely..... But Oswald never got the chance to ask any
questions.... Truly immediately vouched for him as being a TSBD
employee, Baker spun on his heel and continued his flight to the roof.
>
> And Oswald's leaving the building within a minute of his Baker
> encounter also reeks of guilt...
It Does??!..... He had just seen a motorcycle officer with a gun in
his hand asking Truly if he knew this man, and you don't think that
would have caused him to go outside to see what the hell was going
on?? You are not being realistic.
in fact, even more so due to his Baker
> encounter. Oz has a gun shoved in his gut
Please post PROOF that Oswald had a gun "shoved in his gut"
and then hears Reid tell him
> "The President's been shot"
Mrs reid didn't know the president had been shot....She only knew that
some shots had been fired.
as he strolls through the 2nd-Floor
> office.....and then what does Oz decide he wants to do? He decides he
> wants to leave this exciting scene of action and go to a movie in Oak
> Cliff (and sneak into the theater without paying, to boot)!!
There's no evidence that oswald did sneak in the Theater... If he had
been guilty of either crime he'd have been foolish to call attention
to himself by sneaking into the theater unless he WANTED to be taken
into custody so he he could safely talk to the FBI, just as he had
done in new orleans when he got into a shouting match with Carlos
Bringuer.
Walt
Walt
I don't think so......Here's Brennan's testimony
Mr. Belin.
All right.
Did you see anyone in the lineup you recognized?
Mr. Brennan.
Yes.
Mr. Belin.
And what did you say?
Mr. Brennan.
I told Mr. Sorrels and Captain Fritz at that time that Oswald--or the
man in the lineup that I identified looking more like a closest
resemblance to the man in the window than anyone in the lineup.
Oswald RESEMBLED the man in the window.... but the man in the window
was NOT oswald.
Mr. Belin.
As I understand your testimony, then, you said that you told him that
this particular person looked the most like the man you saw on the
sixth floor of the building there.
Mr. Brennan.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Belin.
Now, is there anything else you told the officers at the time of the
lineup?
Mr. Brennan.
Well, I told them I could not make a positive identification.
Mr. Belin.
In that same interview, you stated that you attended a lineup at the
Dallas Police Department at which you picked Lee Harvey Oswald as the
person most closely resembling the man you observed with the rifle in
the window of the Texas School Book Depository, but you stated you
could not positively identify Oswald as the person you saw fire the
rifle.
Now, is this an accurate recording of the statement you made to the
FBI on or about November 227
Mr. Brennan.
Yes; I believe--
Mr. Belin.
In other words, that part of the FBI statement is correct, as to what
you told them?
Mr. Brennan.
Yes.
Mr. Belin.
No.
What was the fact. Could you or could you not actually identify this
person as the man you saw firing the rifle?
Mr. Brennan.
I believed I could with all fairness and sincerity. As you asked me
the question before, had I saw those pictures of Oswald prior, which
· naturally I don't know whether it confused me or made me feel as
though I was taking unfair advantage or what. But with all fairness, I
could have positively identified the man.
I could positively have identified THE MAN....
Mr. Belin.
No. I am referring now to the last interview you had on January 7th,
in which it says that you felt that Oswald most resembled the man you
had seen in the window.
Is that what you told them?
Mr. Brennan.
Yes.
Mr. Belin.
When you said on January 7th that upon seeing Lee Harvey Oswald in the
lineup you felt that Oswald most resembled the man whom you had seen
in the window?
Mr. Brennan.
Yes.
Mr. Belin.
Now, I am referring to a statement to the FBI on January 7th of this
year.
Mr. Brennan.
All right.
Mr. Belin.
By that, did you have reference to your own personal recollection, or
what you said at the time of the Dallas Police Department lineup?
Mr. Brennan.
I believe I was referring to what I said at the Dallas Police
Department.
Mr. Belin.
On January 7th of this year, what is the fact as to whether or not you
could give whether or not you felt on November 22d that the man you
saw in the window was the man you saw in the police lineup--not what
you told him, but what was the fact?
Mr. Brennan.
On January 7th, at that time I did believe that I could give positive
identification as well as I did later.
Mr. Belin.
You mean in the December interview?
Mr. Brennan.
Yes.
Mr. Brennan.
Well, as I previously have said, I had saw the man in the window and I
had saw him on television. He looked much younger on television than
he did from my picture of him in the window--not much younger, but a
few years younger--say 5 years younger.
Oswald appeared to be about 5 years younger
Mr. Belin.
Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the
rifle was wearing?
Mr. Brennan.
No, other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I
mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words.
If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
The man's shirt was light colored...possibly a dingy white.
Mr. Belin.
I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission
Exhibit 150.
Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you
make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
Mr. Brennan.
I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so
lighter.
Mr. Belin.
Than Exhibit 150?
Oswald's Brown shirt is DARKER than the gunman's shirt
Mr. Brennan.
That is the best of my recollection.
Mr. Belin.
All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. Brennan.
I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of
the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I
called their attention to at the lineup.
The gunman was wearing white trousers.... Brennan told the cops that
the gunman was not Oswald, and Oswald was dressed differently than the
man he'd seen with a gun in the TSBD.
Mr. Belin.
What do you mean by that?
Mr. Brennan.
That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the
window.
Mr. Belin.
All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. Brennan.
I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of
the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I
called their attention to at the lineup.
Mr. Belin.
What do you mean by that?
Mr. Brennan.
That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the
window.
It's worth repeating....
Walt
Bud
Now I`m going to have to take you by the hand, and explain to you
what you are reading, because your mind mangles this information. I
see you`ve only produced select portions, so it might be hard to
explain everything to you with what you produced.
> Mr. Belin.
> All right.
> Did you see anyone in the lineup you recognized?
> Mr. Brennan.
> Yes.
> Mr. Belin.
> And what did you say?
> Mr. Brennan.
> I told Mr. Sorrels and Captain Fritz at that time that Oswald--or the
> man in the lineup that I identified looking more like a closest
> resemblance to the man in the window than anyone in the lineup.
>
> Oswald RESEMBLED the man in the window.... but the man in the window
> was NOT oswald.
Jeez, you are dense. Brennan didn`t want to make a positive ID at
the line-up. But he did indicate which man looked closest (Oswald),
but that was as far as he wanted to go at the time. This is not to say
he couldn`t make a positive ID, he just did not for reasons he
explained to the WC.
Here is saying he could have made a positive ID of Oz as the man he
saw.
> As you asked me
> the question before, had I saw those pictures of Oswald prior, which
> · naturally I don't know whether it confused me or made me feel as
> though I was taking unfair advantage or what. But with all fairness, I
> could have positively identified the man.
>
> I could positively have identified THE MAN....
You are an idiot. Who do you think is talking about ? Who was it he
saw pictures of prior? Who was it he selected as being most close at
the line-up? Who was the man he saw on the 6th floor of the TSBD? Who
was being held for Tippit`s murder? To Brennan, all these people are
the same person. Who might that be, Walt?
Yah, in the images he saw on television, Oz looked younger than the
impression ff Oz he got looking up at him from the street.
> Mr. Belin.
> Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the
> rifle was wearing?
> Mr. Brennan.
> No,
See, Walt, he answers "no" when asked directly if he remembered a
specific color for the shirt. Yet you keep claiming Brennan said
white. Idiot.
> other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I
> mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words.
> If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
>
> The man's shirt was light colored...possibly a dingy white.
Or possibly some other light color. He had a chance to say what
color, and he declined. Yet you keep saying he said white. Its just
one of many lies you like to tell.
> Mr. Belin.
> I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission
> Exhibit 150.
> Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you
> make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
> Mr. Brennan.
> I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so
> lighter.
> Mr. Belin.
> Than Exhibit 150?
>
> Oswald's Brown shirt is DARKER than the gunman's shirt
I doubt he was wearing a outer shirt when he shot JFK, I figure he
was only in his t-shirt, like Reid said.
> Mr. Brennan.
> That is the best of my recollection.
> Mr. Belin.
> All right.
> Could you see the man's trousers at all?
> Do you remember any color?
> Mr. Brennan.
> I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of
> the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I
> called their attention to at the lineup.
>
> The gunman was wearing white trousers....
Where does he say "white"? Idiot.
> Brennan told the cops that
> the gunman was not Oswald,
No, he told the cops at the line-up that Oz most closely resembled
the man he saw on the 6th floor of the TSBD, but hedged at making a
positive ID (for reasons he made clear before the WC).
> and Oswald was dressed differently than the
> man he'd seen with a gun in the TSBD.
Impossible to say, since no one has establsihed what Oz was
wearing at the time.
> Mr. Belin.
> What do you mean by that?
> Mr. Brennan.
> That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the
> window.
>
>
> Mr. Belin.
> All right.
> Could you see the man's trousers at all?
> Do you remember any color?
> Mr. Brennan.
> I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of
> the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I
> called their attention to at the lineup.
> Mr. Belin.
> What do you mean by that?
> Mr. Brennan.
> That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the
> window.
>
> It's worth repeating....
Yah, he said elsewhere he is sure Oz is the man he saw, but here he
says he couldn`t ID the clothes. Oz is guilty, but the clothes walk...
> Walt
>
<SNIP>
David Von Pein
Bullshit. The average (and "innocent") person would probably, at the
very, very LEAST immediately (!!) say to the officer: "What's going
on?! I didn't do anything!"
Instead, Sweet Lee maintains a relatively-calm demeanor and says not a
word to the excited police officer.
Go figure.
>>> "That's why I've never believed that Baker had his gun actually pointed AT Oswald." <<<
Yeah...and we also know that you'll do WHATEVER IT TAKES to remove the
noose from around Oswald's neck. And you'll "believe" whatever it
takes in order to achieve that goal. You've made that abundantly and
blatantly obvious for years now.
>>> "He may have had his revolver in his hand, but that's not the same as having it "pointed at" Oswald." <<<
That's not what Baker said (or Truly). Although it's up to each of us
to evaluate Baker's words when he said "I had my gun talking to him
like this".
I'm actually wondering if perhaps a couple of commas shouldn't be
inserted in that sentence there -- to make it look like this: "I had
my gun, talking to him, like this". If Baker said it in that manner,
it would be the same as saying this: "I had my gun like this
{indicating}, {while I was} talking to him".
That's just a hunch on my part. YMMV. .....
Representative BOGGS -When you saw him, was he out of breath, did he
appear to have been running or what?
Mr. BAKER - It didn't appear that to me. He appeared normal you know.
Representative BOGGS -Was he calm and collected?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. He never did say a word or nothing. In fact, he
didn't change his expression one bit.
Mr. BELIN - Did he flinch in any way when you put the gun up in his
face?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir.
Mr. DULLES - There is no testimony that he put the gun up in his face.
Mr. BAKER - I had my gun talking to him like this.
Mr. DULLES - Yes.
Mr. BELIN - How close was your gun to him if it wasn't the face
whatever part of the body it was?
Mr. BAKER - About as far from me to you.
Mr. BELIN - That would be about how far?
Mr. BAKER - Approximately 3 feet.
>>> "But he {LHO} was surprised. Check the testimony of Roy Truly." <<<
Mr. TRULY. He didn't seem to be excited or overly afraid or anything.
He might have been a bit startled, like I might have been if somebody
confronted me. But I cannot recall any change in expression of any
kind on his face.
The above doesn't help your cause much, Walt. Sorry.
IMO, Baker's testimony re. Oswald's "calm" and "unflinching" demeanor
is the best testimony with respect to this topic. Because Baker was
closer to Oswald and had more of a reason to note his behavior in the
lunchroom...because Baker was SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR SHOOTING
SUSPECTS.
>>> "He {Oswald} had just seen a motorcycle officer with a gun in his hand asking Truly if he knew this man, and you don't think that would have caused him to go outside to see what the hell was going on?" <<<
<chuckle> Yeah, and he's so interested in "what the hell was going on"
that he feels like high-tailing it out of there within seconds of
going outside. Right?
Oz's overwhelming desire to watch that Van Heflin double-feature
outweighed his desire to stick around Dealey Plaza, where the biggest
event in the history of Dallas had just occurred right on the front
doorstep of the place where Oswald worked.
As I've said before....Oz must've really LOVED Mr. Heflin (and war
movies).
>>> "You are not being realistic." <<<
I'm being completely realistic (based on the evidence that's sitting
upstairs on that 6th Floor). Oswald's guilty. Mark VII.
>>> "Please post PROOF that Oswald had a gun "shoved in his gut"." <<<
Mr. TRULY. When I reached there, the officer had his gun pointing at
Oswald. The officer turned this way and said, "This man work here?"
And I said, "Yes."
Mr. BELIN. And then what happened?
Mr. TRULY. Then we left Lee Harvey Oswald immediately and continued to
run up the stairways until we reached the fifth floor.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Let me ask you this now. How far was the
officer's gun from Lee Harvey Oswald when he asked the question?
Mr. TRULY. It would be hard for me to say, but it seemed to me like it
was almost touching him.
Mr. BELIN. What portion of his body?
Mr. TRULY. Towards the middle portion of his body.
>>> "Mrs. Reid didn't know the president had been shot. She only knew that some shots had been fired." <<<
But that's not the key issue in this discussion. Reid said to the WC
that she told Oswald "The President has been shot". So THAT'S what
Oswald heard from Mrs. Reid. Whether it was an accurate statement or
not, that's what Reid said to Oswald.
Oddly, however, Reid's next statement to Oz was contradictory to the
first part, when she also said she told Oswald, "But maybe they didn't
hit him".
Those two statements don't go together, of course; because how can the
President be shot, but possibly NOT be "hit". But, obviously, Reid was
a bit rattled and excited; she might have meant to tell the WC that
she told Oswald "But maybe they didn't KILL him", instead of using the
word "hit".
In any event, the idea of JFK being shot was certainly conveyed to
Oswald by Reid before LHO departed the TSBD.
Of course, this is a silly and moot point anyway...since we know that
Oswald knew for a fact that the President had been shot....because
Oswald himself shot and killed him.
>>> "There's no evidence that Oswald did sneak in the theater." <<<
<sigh>
<yawn>
Another "Bullshit" is required here, of course, in response to some
more of Walt's idiocy.
There's ample evidence that he sneaked into the theater. Let's
see....there's the fact that Oswald was INSIDE the theater when he was
arrested. And the fact that the only ticket-seller (J. Postal) said
she never sold a ticket to Oswald on November 22.
Hence, he must have sneaked (snuck?) in.
Is this rocket science to you, Walt?
>>> "If he had been guilty of either crime, he'd have been foolish to call attention to himself by sneaking into the theater..." <<<
"Sneaking" into a DARK theater when he thought (quite obviously) that
nobody had likely seen him do so = "calling attention to himself"?
<hearty laugh>
I get the feeling that Walt creates his "Anybody Except Oswald"
scenarios totally off-the-cuff, as he types.
Walt
She said.... "The president has been shot....but maybe he wasn't
hit."....
I don't know what that means, and I doubt that Oswald could have drawn
an conclusion from that statement.
>
> > Even at
> > that point he didn't know that JFK had actually been hit by the
> > gunfire.
>
> He may have been able to see the spray of blood from the Sniper`s
> Nest. Brennan said he detected a look of satisfaction on Oz`s face
> before he pulled back into the window.
Did wrote: Quote "Brennan said he detected a look of satisfaction on
Oz's face before he pulled back into the window."
I hope that you can provide proof that Brennan said EXACTLY what you
claim he said......If you can't then it's obvious this is just another
of your lies.
Walt
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Because Curry himself sad that had no proof that Oswald was in a sixth
floor window at the time of the shooting.
How the hell do you know what Brennan was thinking.... When you were
defending Jack Dougherty, you told me that you have to go by what the
person says ..but now your saying that you know that HB didn't want to
make a positive ID.
You do know that the line up was only a couple of hours after he wrote
in his affidavit that He was "sure he'd be able to identify the sixth
floor gunman if he ever saw him again"
He was looking right ar Lee oswald in the line up and said that Lee
was the man in the line up who most closely RESEMBLED the man but he
was NOT the gunman. For all we know the other men in the line up
could have been a 5'1" Vietnamese, a 6'9" Negro, A 300 pound Sumo
wrestler, and a 5' 2' Chinese. so naturallly Lee would have been the
man who most closely resembled the 30 to 35 year old, 165 to175 pound
gunman who was dressed in white clothes.
> > · naturally I don't know whether it confused me or made me feel as
> > though I was taking unfair advantage or what. But with all fairness, I
> > could have positively identified the man.
>
> > I could positively have identified THE MAN....
>
> You are an idiot. Who do you think is talking about ? Who was it he
> saw pictures of prior? Who was it he selected as being most close at
> the line-up? Who was the man he saw on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
It wasn't Osawld
Who was being held for Tippit`s murder? To Brennan, all these people
are
> the same person. Who might that be, Walt?
Yer interpreting his words as if you know....but your hatred for
Oswald has you blinded.
This is great.....A simple example of your dishonesty...
He did NOT say "no' and stop at that point he said... " No, other
than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I
mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words.
If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
WHITE is not a SPECIFIC color..... like Red , Yellow, Blue, Green,
etc.... So Brennan said that he could distinguish no SPECIFIC color
other than dingy white or possibly khaki.
Thank you for exposing yourself as the liar you are.
Walt
>
> > other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I
> > mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words.
> > If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
>
> > The man's shirt was light colored...possibly a dingy white.
>
> Or possibly some other light color. He had a chance to say what
> color, and he declined. Yet you keep saying he said white. Its just
> one of many lies you like to tell.
>
>
>
> > Mr. Belin.
> > I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission
> > Exhibit 150.
> > Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you
> > make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
> > Mr. Brennan.
> > I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so
> > lighter.
> > Mr. Belin.
> > Than Exhibit 150?
>
> > Oswald's Brown shirt
>
Walt
Ah contrair..... That's EXACTLY what I was trying to say... "He
might have been a bit startled, like I might have been if somebody
confronted me."
Yes I used the word "Surprised" ....and if you'll check your
dictionary the word that Truly used (startle) is a stronger word than
"surprise" but anyway you slice it Oswald was not a total emotionless
ice cube. He was startled by the sudden appearance of officer Baker,
and without a doubt He was curious about what the hell was happening
because he left almost immediately to go see what was going on. He
met Mrs Reid on the way out of the building and she said ..."The
president has been shot...but I don't know if he was hit" .... Who
could drawn any conclusion by that statement??
Walt
>
> IMO, Baker's testimony re. Oswald's "calm" and "unflinching" demeanor
> is the best testimony with respect to this topic. Because Baker was
> closer to Oswald and had more of a reason to note his behavior in the
> lunchroom...because Baker was SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR SHOOTING
> SUSPECTS.
>
> >>> "He {Oswald} had just seen a motorcycle officer with a gun in his hand asking Truly if he knew this man, and you don't think that would have caused him to go outside to see what the hell was going on?" <<<
>
> <chuckle> Yeah, and he's so interested in "what the hell was going on"
> that he feels like high-tailing it out of there within seconds of
> going outside. Right?
I feel strongly that Oswald knew something....That's obvious because
they snuffed him just as soon as they could.. He wanted to tell the
FBI, and Hosty had told him to go to the theater and he would contact
him there. He wasn't part of the conspiracy but he knew the plot was
afoot....
Walt
Walt
Not exactly "stuck in his gut" now is it? And Baker said his gun
was about three feet from Oswald's stomach.
Either way you and your asshole Buddy exaggerate the evidence far
more than I do... and yet you scream that I'm lying if I mis-spell a
word.
You're a coward in denial.
Walt
David Von Pein
to the Baker-differing account of the event that Roy S. Truly
provided? .....
Mr. BELIN. How far was the officer's gun from Lee Harvey Oswald when
he asked the question?
Mr. TRULY. It would be hard for me to say, but it seemed to me like it
was almost touching him.
>>> "And yet you scream that I'm lying if I mis-spell a word." <<<
Yeah, like misspelling the word "misspell" by adding the incorrect
hyphen in there. ~wink~
David Von Pein
And then left the Plaza entirely a very few seconds later.
Yeah, he was really "curious", huh?
>>> ""The president has been shot...but I don't know if he was hit" .... Who could drawn any conclusion by that statement?" <<<
<chuckle>
As if Oz needed any help in drawing any "conclusion" re. the shooting
of anyone in DP on 11/22. You're a howl, Walt.
And it might be nice if you'd get the quotes from witnesses verbatim
if you're going to put them inside quotation marks. You've twice
quoted Reid incorrectly. Albeit just slightly, but incorrectly just
the same. (Or you could at least include the word "paraphrased" after
an approx. quotation, which I often do as well when I'm unsure of an
exact verbatim quote.)
BTW, is tomorrow's new "suspect" primed and ready for the Walt "He/She
Conspired To Kill JFK" treatment? Hope so. I wouldn't want to see any
innocent TSBD employee left out of the Walt Kook(ie) Mix.
dcwi...@netscape.net
No, it was not "aside"--it was part of it. You brought up Fischer,
specifically, as an example to counter his "lie" re "they all said",
but Fischer does not counter any such thing. If you had cited Edwards
or Brennan or Walther, I wouldn't have said anything, because I don't
recall their saying "sport shirt", tho they may have, in one place or
another. I'd have to research it again, as you should have researched
Fischer a little more, & not based your counter-argument on just one
Fischer statement.... No one's gonna believe you since your prime
example was questionable.
dw
>
> > > > Let's do a direct quote instead of just
> > > > recollecting:
> > > > Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
> > > > slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
> > > > Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
>
> > > But in his affidavit of the 22nd, he said he could only see the
> > > man`s head.
>
> > Not the point. Walt wasn't lying about Fischer--he was referencing
> > another source. And no one has ever reconciled Fischer's various
> > statements--in the Lewis report, Fischer notes shirt *and* slacks!
>
> Walt was lying because he said all these men attested to the same
> thing. You can`t claim all Three Stooges are bald because Curly is.
> Walt does this kind of fudging with witness testimony all the time.
> I`m going to start calling him more closely on it.
Like I was calling you on your comments re Fischer. I knew you were
wrong re the latter. And to salvage your argument, you're going to
have to track down every statement the other principals made, & quote
them on the shirt....
This are not
> mistakes, it is phrasing the information dishonestly to make his
> position seem stronger than it really is. Either he`ll be more careful
> with his assertions, or he`ll be called a liar a lot.
>
> > > > Couldn't get more specific than that about a collar....
>
> > > Sure you could. This doesn`t establish whether he was claiming to
> > > have seen actual folded down material, or using "collar" to designate
> > > an area on a shirt.
>
> > And McA sez *CTers* are picky! How would a "sport shirt" be
> > "opened"? Oh, yes, yes--the guy could have cut open an area of the
> > shirt with a pair of scissors. That's certainly possible....
>
> I don`t expect these witnesses to note specific details on people
> they saw while casually observing their surroundongs (Brennan prior to
> the shooting, anyway, plus Fischer and Edwards. Rowland was the only
> one prior to the shooting to have reason to scrutinize the man on the
> 6th floor he saw). If Fischer can`t be sure whether it was a t-shirt
> or sports shirt he was looking at, just how much detail did he note?
> How much of what these witnesses relate is a positive assertion, that
> they are relating details that they are sure of (and even if they did
> say they were sure of a detail, that wouldn`t make that detail a
> positive thing)? they are relating impressions, the usual mush kooks
> try to spin into concrete.
Brennan Fischer Edwards Walther however good a look they got at the
guy agreed re light-colored clothing, & the Weaver Polaroid seems to
bear them out....
>
> In any case, a v-necked t-shirt could be referred to as open at the
> collar, even though the shirt has no real collar. It`s an area as much
> as a clothing feature. Put it this way, if the limo had a solid area
> in back instead of a real trunk, wouldn`t the witnesses still say
> Jackie climbed out onto the trunk? They wouldn`t say "Jackie climbed
> out onto the are where a trunk would be if the limo had a trunk".
>
> > > > dw
>
dcwi...@netscape.net
> >>> "Oswald's actions indicate that he DID NOT know that JFK had been shot when Baker and Truly saw him in the lunchroom." <<<
>
> I couldn't disagree more strongly.
>
> Oswald wasn't the slightest bit surprised to see Baker's gun pointed
> at him. And Oswald never said a word, such as: "WTF is this? Why are
> you holding a gun on me?!"
>
> The reason he wasn't surprised? -- He expected the cops to show up
> fast. How could he NOT have expected them? Oz just fired three loud
> shots from upstairs, therefore he KNEW the place would be crawling
> with police really quick.
Circa 10 minutes later is "really quick"? It took about that long for
every cop except Baker to reconnoitre, & realize that Curry & Decker's
knoll hunch was in error. The cops didn't begin to think "depository"
until the police-radio messages from Harkness & Hill at 12:36-7. I
took a while for Euins to hook up with Harkness, & for the 12:37 "2nd
window" witness (whoever he was) to hook up with Hill. I think the
cops would have caught on quicker except for their bosses' original
misdirection....
dw
David Von Pein
That's not the point I was making re. LHO thinking the cops would be
there asap.
Oz couldn't have known it would take about 10 minutes to seal off the
building. His mindset almost certainly was "I BETTER HAUL ASS, BECAUSE
THE COPS WILL BE HERE VERY SOON SINCE I JUST FIRED THREE LOUD RIFLE
SHOTS FROM HERE".
Makes sense too, right?
Does to me.
dcwi...@netscape.net
> > > > > > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > > > > > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > > > > > insanity.
>
> > > > > Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
>
> > > > Wow!!... What a gross oversimplification of the IMAGINED event!!
>
> > > Well, kook conjecture might have him repelling down the side of the
> > > building, but I think the stairs are a more likely.
>
> > > > Surely you can do better than this insipid display.....
>
> > > Being an LN means I have to entertain the simple solutions first.
> > > You kooks leap right over the mundane, to the fantastic.
>
> > > > > > man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
> > > > > > just minutes before, and during the shooting.
>
> > > > > <snicker> Walt prefaces it with "The truth is...", and then goes on
> > > > > to tell a series of lies. Do you get paid by the lie, Walt?
>
> > > > List the lies......
>
> > > Again? I`ve been over them numerous times. Others have, going back
> > > years. Will it sink in if it is explained to you one more time? Lets
> > > do it this way... quote Brennan saying 30-35, for starters. Then quote
> > > him saying the man he saw was "attired in a white shirt and trousers".
> > > you as they are to me.
>
> > did NOT fit Oswald's physical description on the sixth floor with a
> > rifle at 12:30 that day.
>
> No, the truth is that it was Oz firing, and the description Brennan
> gave of him wasn`t a perfect one.
>
> > Howard Brennan said the man who he saw
> > standing and aiming the rifle out of a sixth floor window appeared to
> > be in his early thirties, he weighed about 165 to 175 pounds. Howard
> > Brennan, Arnold Rowland and Bob Edwards and Ronald Fischer all saw the
> > man who was dressed in a very light colored shirt,
>
> Show that any of them used the word "very". Why do you always lie
> about what the witnesses say?
See below. You said "any". Rowland used "very".
dw
>
> > which they all
> > described as being white,
>
> Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
Well, on a technicality, you could say they didn't all say "white".
Brennan said only "light colored", in both his 11/22 statements.
Which could mean, most likely, white or yellow. But Edwards said
"light colored... yellow or white" (11/22 statement). Walther said
"white shirt" (12/4/63 FBI interview). Fischer said "light in color,
probably white." (WC testimony p194) And Rowland (see below) said
"very light colored, white or light blue". So 4 of the 5 witnesses
include the actual word, & the 5th implies something like white.
dw
>
> > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
>
> Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
>
Well, I lied--I did go back & do a little re-research. Edwards *did*
say "sport shirt" (11/22 statement). And Fischer told Deputy Lewis
"sport shirt", & Fischer himself said "sport shirt or T-shirt" in his
WC testimony (p194). And Rowland clinches it, because he testified,
He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
blue.... This was open at the collar. I think it was UNBUTTONED about
halfway, & then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt UNDER
this." (p171)
So Rowland sez the overshirt had buttons, was open at the collar, & he
could see the T shirt under it. All three, then, said sport shirt or
*described* one.... And Brennan said the suspect "may have been
wearing a light-weight jacket or sweater"! (11/22/63 FBI statement)
I think that, between them, the 5 witnesses rule out a suspect wearing
only a shirt of the "T" type, & they seem also to rule out Oswald's
rather dark arrest shirt (With Malice p408).
dw
> > The
> > collar was open at the neck,
>
> Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
> necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
Rowland said more than "open"--he said "unbuttoned"! ie, NOT a T
shirt!
>
> > and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> > beneath the light colored sport shirt.
>
> One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
Rowland *did* say that. But, no, they all didn't.
>
> > Howard Brennan said the gunman
> > was wearing trousers that were a little lighter colored than his
> > shirt.
>
> Givens said Oz was wearing green clothes. Does this mean it wasn`t
> Oz he spoke to on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
>
> > Lee Oswald had just celebrated his 24th birthday, he weighed 140
> > pounds according to his booking sheet.
>
> But not his autopsy. And establish as fact that people casually
> scanning a crowd should accurately guess the weights of the people
> they look at.
>
> > He was wearing a reddish brown
> > shirt with a white T-shirt beneath it, and dark gray trousers at the
> > time of the shooting.
>
> Not according to the only person who saw Oz at the time of the
> shooting.
>
> > He went to his room and changed his clothes
> > before going to the Texas theater.
>
> His pants, anyway.
>
> > He put his reddish brown shirt and
> > dark gray trousers in a dresser drawer in his room.
>
> What is the CE number of the shirt in the drawer?
>
> > The police
> > recovered the shirt and trousers from that dresser drawer later that
> > afternoon and took photos of the items the recovered from his room.
> > the shirt and trousers are two of the items in the photographs.
>
> And they took pictures of the shirt Oz was wearing when arrested,
> CE150. It has the hole in the right sleeve that Mrs Bledsoe said she
> saw when Oz was on the bus.
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId...
>
> > There
> > are also memos written by the cops who searched his room in which they
> > described the shirt and trousers that they recovered.
>
> The shirt found in his drawer was CE 151, the one that can be seen
> in the link I gave above.
>
> > All of the evidence indicates that Lee Oswald was NOT the man with the
> > rifle who was dressed in the white clothing.
>
> Only when you ignore all the evidence that indicates it was Oz
> firing from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
Bud
Of course that isn`t what he said. And there was physical evidence
on the 6th floor shooting, and a corroborrating witness.
That is what he said. You need to read his entire testimony in
context, not just excerpts, Walt. And then you have to have the
reading comprehension to understand what you are reading. I can`t
supply that.
> You do know that the line up was only a couple of hours after he wrote
> in his affidavit that He was "sure he'd be able to identify the sixth
> floor gunman if he ever saw him again"
That was true, he could have IDied Oz in the line-up. He didn`t,
for the reasons he gave.
> He was looking right ar Lee oswald in the line up and said that Lee
> was the man in the line up who most closely RESEMBLED the man but he
> was NOT the gunman.
Stop lying, Walt. He never said that Lee was not the gunman. In
fact, he said Lee was the man he saw shooting, and explained why he
didn`t select Oz at the time. Your inablility to discern this from his
testimony doesn`t mean it isn`t there.
> For all we know the other men in the line up
> could have been a 5'1" Vietnamese, a 6'9" Negro, A 300 pound Sumo
> wrestler, and a 5' 2' Chinese. so naturallly Lee would have been the
> man who most closely resembled the 30 to 35 year old, 165 to175 pound
> gunman who was dressed in white clothes.
Who said the gunman was wearing white clothes. idiot? According to
what Brennan told the WC, he recognized Oz as the man he saw shooting,
but choose not to make a positive ID out of fear for his family. This
is what the man said, Walt. I know you perfer the words you put in his
mouth to what he actually said, but that isn`t how it works.
What, nothing here? Who do you suppose Belin is reffering to when he
says "this person"?
> > > As you asked me
> > > the question before, had I saw those pictures of Oswald prior, which
> > > · naturally I don't know whether it confused me or made me feel as
> > > though I was taking unfair advantage or what. But with all fairness, I
> > > could have positively identified the man.
> >
> > > I could positively have identified THE MAN....
> >
> > You are an idiot. Who do you think he is talking about ? Who was it he
> > saw pictures of prior? Who was it he selected as being most close at
> > the line-up? Who was the man he saw on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
>
> It wasn't Osawld
Then why is he using that name?
> Who was being held for Tippit`s murder? To Brennan, all these people
> are
> > the same person. Who might that be, Walt?
>
> Yer interpreting his words as if you know....but your hatred for
> Oswald has you blinded.
You`re inability to read has left you stupid. You think they are
reffering to someone else, when they keep making references that can
only be Oswald. Who else could Brennan be seeing on televiosion? Who
else was being hed for Tippit`s murder? Who else did they say was the
man Brennan selected out of the line-up as looking closest to the man
he saw on the 6th floor. Throughout, they are talking about one
person, they just don`t refer to him by name every place. So, you
think they are talking about Oswald, and continue, and continue, and
then at some point, if they don`t use Oz`s name, they are talking
about the mailman?
> > impression of Oz he got looking up at him from the street.
> >
> > > Mr. Belin.
> > > Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the
> > > rifle was wearing?
> > > Mr. Brennan.
> > > No,
> >
> > See, Walt, he answers "no" when asked directly if he remembered a
> > specific color for the shirt. Yet you keep claiming Brennan said
> > white. Idiot.
> This is great.....A simple example of your dishonesty...
> He did NOT say "no' and stop at that point he said... " No, other
> than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I
> mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words.
> If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
An example of your stupidity, more like. The answer to the specific
question Belin asked, whether he could remember a specific color, was
"no". You think people say "No, I don`t remember the specific color,
but the color was such-and such"? The answer Brennan gave to Belin`s
question was no, and he then went on to discuss possibilities, but
that doesn`t change his original, negative assertion to Belin`s
question. Idiot.
> WHITE is not a SPECIFIC color..... like Red , Yellow, Blue, Green,
> etc.... So Brennan said that he could distinguish no SPECIFIC color
> other than dingy white or possibly khaki.
He is offering possibilities, knucklehead. He isn`t stating that
any of these colors are the color of the shirt he saw.
> Thank you for exposing yourself as the liar you are.
This is why you shouldn`t be looking into these things. Information
goes through your brain and comes out all twisted up. The witness
never states the shirt he saw was white, so therefore you write a
hundred times that this witness said the shirt was white. I guess it
isn`t so much that you are a liar, maybe you honestly can`t tell what
Brennan is saying.
Bud
David Von Pein wrote:
> What part of "ALMOST TOUCHING HIM" don't you understand with respect
> to the Baker-differing account of the event that Roy S. Truly
> provided? .....
>
> Mr. BELIN. How far was the officer's gun from Lee Harvey Oswald when
> he asked the question?
>
> Mr. TRULY. It would be hard for me to say, but it seemed to me like it
> was almost touching him.
Ah-ha, supersleuth Walt will next point out that it doesn`t say what
part of the gun was pointing towards Oz, and claim it could have been
the handle.
Bud
No, it was a completely different argument. I called him a liar for
saying *all* the witnesses were saying the same thing. I brought of
Fischer to address the specific "collar" issue. The claim that they
were *all* saying the same thing is what I was calling a lie.
> You brought up Fischer,
> specifically, as an example to counter his "lie" re "they all said",
No, I didn`t. How could one person of that group account for what
they *all* said? Walt`s original assertion that started this exchange
was "Rowland, Fischer, Edwards all described the light colored shirt
as being a sports shirt with a collar." To which I replied "Another
lie, they all did not". What Walt wrote remains a lie until which time
you can show each of those individuals saying the man they saw was
wearing a "light colored sports shirt with a collar". That was my
original objection, the use of the word *all*, not that any one of
them never said such a thing.
> but Fischer does not counter any such thing. If you had cited Edwards
> or Brennan or Walther, I wouldn't have said anything, because I don't
> recall their saying "sport shirt", tho they may have, in one place or
> another. I'd have to research it again, as you should have researched
> Fischer a little more, & not based your counter-argument on just one
> Fischer statement.... No one's gonna believe you since your prime
> example was questionable.
I didn`t have to research that a all, because I knew it wasn`t true
as soon as I saw it. Unlikely you are going to have multiple witnesses
look at the same thing and descrbe it using the exact same terms.
> dw
>
> >
> > > > > Let's do a direct quote instead of just
> > > > > recollecting:
> > > > > Fischer specifically said the suspect was wearing "sport shirt and
> > > > > slacks. Sport shirt opened at COLLAR."
> > > > > Hearings v19p526 (Deputy Lewis' report 11/23)
> >
> > > > But in his affidavit of the 22nd, he said he could only see the
> > > > man`s head.
> >
> > > Not the point. Walt wasn't lying about Fischer--he was referencing
> > > another source. And no one has ever reconciled Fischer's various
> > > statements--in the Lewis report, Fischer notes shirt *and* slacks!
> >
> > Walt was lying because he said all these men attested to the same
> > thing. You can`t claim all Three Stooges are bald because Curly is.
> > Walt does this kind of fudging with witness testimony all the time.
> > I`m going to start calling him more closely on it.
>
> Like I was calling you on your comments re Fischer. I knew you were
> wrong re the latter.
I wasn`t wrong. Fischer did indeed say the shirt he saw could have
been a t-shirt.
> And to salvage your argument, you're going to
> have to track down every statement the other principals made, & quote
> them on the shirt....
Wanna bet? If you want to support Walt`s assertion that all these
men said the man they saw was wearing a sports shirt with a collar, be
my guest.
I have no real objection to the "light colored clothing"
description. It`s in the specific details about that clothing it
becomes murky, to my mind. Walt is doing his usual thing of latching
onto supplied details that might tend to indicate it wasn`t Oz, and
ignoring the details that are inclusive of him.
Walt
> What part of "ALMOST TOUCHING HIM" don't you understand with respect
> to the Baker-differing account of the event that Roy S. Truly
> provided? .....
>
> Mr. BELIN. How far was the officer's gun from Lee Harvey Oswald when
> he asked the question?
>
> Mr. TRULY. It would be hard for me to say, but it seemed to me like it
> was almost touching him.
Perhaps Truly perceived that Baker's revolver was "almost touching"
Oswald's stomach, but Baker said his gun was about three feet from
Oswald's stomach, but the point is you lied when you said....Quote "Oz
has a gun shoved in his gut" uquote
Both Baker and Truly refute your lie..... Do you and your asshole
buddy now want to admit that you lied?
Walt
Bud
That was poorly worded. My *objection*, what I was refering to as a
lie, was that they all said "very light colored clothing". My
*challenge*, was for him to produce even one of them using the word
"very". The distinction was clear in my mind, but poorly explained.
> dw
> >
> > > which they all
> > > described as being white,
> >
> > Another lie, they did not all say the shirt was white.
>
> Well, on a technicality, you could say they didn't all say "white".
> Brennan said only "light colored", in both his 11/22 statements.
> Which could mean, most likely, white or yellow. But Edwards said
> "light colored... yellow or white" (11/22 statement). Walther said
> "white shirt" (12/4/63 FBI interview). Fischer said "light in color,
> probably white." (WC testimony p194) And Rowland (see below) said
> "very light colored, white or light blue". So 4 of the 5 witnesses
> include the actual word, & the 5th implies something like white.
No, dw, it doesn`t work like that. If the witnesses state the shirt
was white, then you can assert the witness said the shirt was white.
If they don`t positively say, then you can`t. Nothing you write is
going to make what Walt wrote true.
> dw
> >
> > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
> >
> > Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> > have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
> >
> Well, I lied--I did go back & do a little re-research. Edwards *did*
> say "sport shirt" (11/22 statement). And Fischer told Deputy Lewis
> "sport shirt", & Fischer himself said "sport shirt or T-shirt" in his
> WC testimony (p194). And Rowland clinches it, because he testified,
> He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
> blue.... This was open at the collar. I think it was UNBUTTONED about
> halfway, & then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt UNDER
> this." (p171)
> So Rowland sez the overshirt had buttons,
Amazing that Rowland is about twice as far away as Brennan, and can
make out buttons. This is where it becomes obvious that the witnesses
are relating impressions. Look at the pictures of Oz in custody in his
t-shirt, and say that the "v" shape of his t-shirt couldn`t look like
a partially unbuttoned shirt from a distance.
> was open at the collar, & he
> could see the T shirt under it. All three, then, said sport shirt or
> *described* one.... And Brennan said the suspect "may have been
> wearing a light-weight jacket or sweater"! (11/22/63 FBI statement)
Yah, what color was the jacket Oz brought into work that morning.
Was it light?
> I think that, between them, the 5 witnesses rule out a suspect wearing
> only a shirt of the "T" type, & they seem also to rule out Oswald's
> rather dark arrest shirt (With Malice p408).
I don`t think you can rule out the t-shirt. Some of these
observations were made very casually, you don`t think Edwards or
Fischer could accurately describe the people standing on either side
of them, or any of the other dozens of people they may have spent a
few moments looking at, do you? Context should be considered. I`ve
never seen anything produced that shows just how accurate witnesses
are when relating clothing.
> dw
> > > The
> > > collar was open at the neck,
> >
> > Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
> > necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
>
> Rowland said more than "open"--he said "unbuttoned"! ie, NOT a T
> shirt!
<snicker> Did he say how many buttons down the shirt was unbuttoned?
This isn`t concrete, it`s mush.
> > > and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> > > beneath the light colored sport shirt.
> >
> > One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
>
> Rowland *did* say that. But, no, they all didn't.
Yah. And Walt needs to be taught to stop phrasing his assertions
like he does. He does it dishonestly, to make his points seem
stronger, and I intend to call him on it.
Walt
> >>> "He was curious about what the hell was happening because he left almost immediately to go see what was going on." <<<
>
> And then left the Plaza entirely a very few seconds later.
>
> Yeah, he was really "curious", huh?
>
> >>> ""The president has been shot...but I don't know if he was hit" .... Who could drawn any conclusion by that statement?" <<<
>
> <chuckle>
>
> As if Oz needed any help in drawing any "conclusion" re. the shooting
> of anyone in DP on 11/22. You're a howl, Walt.
The basic problem between you and I is.....I'm an American who
believes a person should be considered innocent until he is judged by
a panel of his fellow citizens. You on the other hand obviously
believe a person is guilty unless he can prove himself to be
innocent. Are you a citizen of North Korea?
I see Oswald as a startled young man who didn't have a clue what the
hell was going on when a motorcycle officer suddenly appeared in the
lunchroom with his revolver in his hand. I base my contention on what
both Baker and Truly said about Oswald's countenance when they saw him
in the lunchroom just seconds after the shooting. Truly himself said
that Oswald reacted to the sudden confrontation, just as he himself
might have reacted in that situation. He said Oswald face registered
surprise.
You on the other hand believe Oswald is guilty of murdering the
President just seconds before the lunchroom encounter. To support your
contention of the man's guilt you have to believe he was insane.
Because no sane person could commit a brutal violent murder, in front
of hundreds of people, and then show no sign that he'd just committed
the crime.
You believe that he could have blew JFK's brains out, and then dashed
to the lunchroom, and appeared to be calm, cool. and collected when he
arrived there just a couple of seconds before Baker encountered him
there. You ignore the FACT that Truly said his face registered
surprise and curiosity when he saw Oswald over Bakers shoulder. You
believe he was the most accomplished actor ever ...A raving lunatic
who could murder the President of the United States, and recognize the
enormity of the crime ( indicated by the imagined action that he
dashed away from the window, and tried to hide in the lunchroom ) but
not show a scintilla of fear or excitement, just mere seconds after
committing the crime.
I gotta tell ya Pea Brain..... You are making a fool outta yourself.
A fool who would believe damned near anything a person in authority
told him.
Walt
Walt
> > seconds before the shooting which killed President Kennedy. The
> > Warren Commision issued a decree entitled, The Warren Report, in which
> > they invented scenarios to show that Lee Oswald was the killer. They
> > questioned hundreds of people and recorded their testimony, then they
> > selected the testimony that was most beneficial to their imagined
> > scenario. The basis of their scenario was: Lee Oswald fired a 6.5mm
> > Mannlicher Carcano rifle three times in 5.6 seconds, from the SE
> > corner window of the sixth floor of the TSBD, and killed President
> > Kennedy, wounded Texas Governor John Connally, and a spectator named
> > James Teague. They claimed that Lee Oswald was alone on the sixth
> > floor of the TSBD at 12:30 when the shots were fired. Their scenario
> > depicted Oswald as lurking on the sixth floor alone from 12:00 to
> > 12:30 and then fleeing down the stairs to the second floor lunchroom
> > where he was confronted by DPD officer Marrion Baker about 90 seconds
> > later.
>
> > There isn't a shred of evidence to support their story that Lee Oswald
> > was on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting.
>
> Besides a witness who said he saw him there.
>
> > absurd story the W.C. created to make it appear that Oswald was there
> > at that time, but fled down the stairs to the lunchroom, borders on
> > insanity.
>
> Yah, how could Oswald use stairs? Madness, I tell you.
>
> > man who was attired in a white shirt and trousers on the sixth floor
> > just minutes before, and during the shooting.
>
> <snicker> Walt prefaces it with "The truth is...", and then goes on
> to tell a series of lies. Do you get paid by the lie, Walt?
>
> > reported seeing him there. This man could NOT have been Lee Oswald,
>
> Sure it could.. You just pretend there are reasons to believe it
> couldn`t be.
>
> > because the physical description did NOT fit Oswald
>
> The descriptions that went over the airwaves at both the JFK murder
> and the Tippit murder are reasonable descriptions of Oz.
>
> > wearing DARK colored clothing at the time.
>
> So you claim. There is conflicting information about this.
>
> > So who could that gunman
> > have been??
>
> Oswald. You still can`t even get the easy ones.
>
> > Could that gunman have been JackDougherty?
>
> Anybody but you precious patsy. How about Mrs Reid?
>
> > He admitted that he was
> > on the sixth floor just seconds before the shooting.
>
> He said he was on the 5th floor when he heard the shots, so I guess
> that clears him. That was a close one, he incriminated himself,
> luckily he was able to clear himself also.
>
> > He was very
> > nervous when he was questioned by the W.C., and gave confusing and
> > contradictory testimony.
>
> Couldn`t be he was an excitable person, who became confused when
> pressed? Didn`t Todd produce a medical report from the military that
> said something along those lines?
>
> > He said he went to the sixth floor at about
> > 12:40 after eating his lunch and started filling book orders. That
> > can't possibly be true because the TSBD was swarming with cops at
> > 12:40.
>
> This is sure to stump Walt. For some reason, he can`t wrap his tiny
> mind around the consept that people don`t generally know the time, or
> keep accurate track of how much has passed, how long things take, ect.
>
> > He gave a clue to the true time that he went to the sixth
> > floor when he said that he had just left the sixth floor and arrived
> > on the fith floor when he heard a shot. It is an established fact
> > that the time for that first shot was 12:30, so he must have went to
> > the sixth floor at about 12:20, after eating his lunch.
>
> I wouldn`t be confident that Doughtery was on the fifth floor when
> he heard the shot. Nothing he says is worth much without
> corroboration.
>
> > Here's an excerpt from his testimony.
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
>
> > I'm sorry it's so long and confused but I wanted to post the whole
> > thing rather than select the statements that support my contention
> > that perhaps the W.C. was right in saying that JFK was killed by a
> > lone nut.....they just got the wrong lone nut.
>
> Someone needs to throw a net over you. Do you really think you`ve
> presented any real reason to consider Doughtery a suspect?
AFFIDAVIT IN ANY FACT
THE STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF DALLAS
BEFORE ME, Patsy Collins, a Notary Public in and for said County,
State of
Texas, on this day personally appeared Jack E. Dougherty w/m/40, 1827
So.
Marsalis WH-6-7170 who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes
and
says:
I am employed at the Texas School Book Depository at 411 Elm and have
been
since 1952. I was working on the sixth floor today. There was [sic]
six of us
working on the floor. The others were Bill Lovelady, William Shelby,
Danny
Arce, Bonnie Williams, and Charles Givens. I went back to work at
12:45 p.m.
I had already gone back to work and I gone down on the fifth [sic] to
get
some stock when I heard a shot. It sounded like it was coming from
inside the
building, but I couldn't tell from where. I went down on the first
floor, and
asked a man named Eddie Piper if he had heard anything and he said
yes, that
he had heard three shots. I then went back on the sixth floor. I
didn't see
anyone on the floor except the people I named. There was another
employee
that is named Lee Oswald that I saw on the sixth floor. He works all
over the
building, but I saw him on the sixth floor shortly before noon. I
didn't see
Oswald in the building after lunch.
/s/ Jack E. Dougherty
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME THIS 22 DAY OF November A.D. 1963
/s/ Patsy Collins
Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas
>
>
>
>
>
> > Walt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 1 Apr, 23:13, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >>> "He was curious about what the hell was happening because he left almost immediately to go see what was going on." <<<
> >
> > And then left the Plaza entirely a very few seconds later.
> >
> > Yeah, he was really "curious", huh?
> >
> > >>> ""The president has been shot...but I don't know if he was hit" .... Who could drawn any conclusion by that statement?" <<<
> >
> > <chuckle>
> >
> > As if Oz needed any help in drawing any "conclusion" re. the shooting
> > of anyone in DP on 11/22. You're a howl, Walt.
>
> The basic problem between you and I is.....I'm an American who
> believes a person should be considered innocent until he is judged by
> a panel of his fellow citizens. You on the other hand obviously
> believe a person is guilty unless he can prove himself to be
> innocent. Are you a citizen of North Korea?
Hitler will be pleased to hear you absolve him of any blame.
> I see Oswald as a startled young man who didn't have a clue what the
> hell was going on when a motorcycle officer suddenly appeared in the
> lunchroom with his revolver in his hand. I base my contention on what
> both Baker and Truly said about Oswald's countenance when they saw him
> in the lunchroom just seconds after the shooting. Truly himself said
> that Oswald reacted to the sudden confrontation, just as he himself
> might have reacted in that situation. He said Oswald face registered
> surprise.
If Oz did shoot Kennedy, wouldn`t he know that acting calm was the
key to getting the policeman to let him go?
> You on the other hand believe Oswald is guilty of murdering the
> President just seconds before the lunchroom encounter. To support your
> contention of the man's guilt you have to believe he was insane.
> Because no sane person could commit a brutal violent murder, in front
> of hundreds of people, and then show no sign that he'd just committed
> the crime.
What do you base this on? I`ve seen guys in high speed chases, with
dozens of cop cars chasing them, get out of their car at the end as if
nothing happened. Watch more Spike TV, you`ll see all kinds of
criminals try all kinds of acts.
> You believe that he could have blew JFK's brains out, and then dashed
> to the lunchroom, and appeared to be calm, cool. and collected when he
> arrived there just a couple of seconds before Baker encountered him
> there.
Was there a better alternative available to him than acting
inconspicuos?
> You ignore the FACT that Truly said his face registered
> surprise and curiosity when he saw Oswald over Bakers shoulder. You
> believe he was the most accomplished actor ever ...
How do you know that Baker would have released Oz if Truly hadn`t
vouched for his presence in the building?
>A raving lunatic
> who could murder the President of the United States,
Oz wasn`t the "raving lunatic" type. He was the "coldly
calculating" type. More like Timothy McViegh.
> and recognize the
> enormity of the crime ( indicated by the imagined action that he
> dashed away from the window, and tried to hide in the lunchroom ) but
> not show a scintilla of fear or excitement, just mere seconds after
> committing the crime.
A day consists of mere seconds. Oz had days to think about what he
was going to do.
> I gotta tell ya Pea Brain..... You are making a fool outta yourself.
> A fool who would believe damned near anything a person in authority
> told him.
So, according to Walt, you can commit any crime you like, as long
as you be sure to *look* innocent after you commit it. Because only a
fool would think an innocent looking person could be guilty. Stellar.
Bud
Yah, Walt, this is Doughtery`s affidavit. Do you have a point to
make?
Walt
Patience..... just be patient..... and be prepared.
Walt
David Von Pein
LOL.
Walt The Hairsplitter Extraordinaire strikes once more.
I'm lovin' it.
And what about today's new "suspect", Walt?
Isn't Elsie Dorman a "suspect" YET?? Surely she is! I think she and
Dougherty were have a torrid affair on their lunch hours (she was
carrying JD's baby, rumor has it). They probably were in cahoots and
planned the crime together....Jack shooting the President, while Elsie
filmed the carnage.
David Von Pein
Walt just keeps on getting better (comedy-wise). You gotta love it
when a kook tells a non-kook that he's "making a fool" out of himself
by merely citing the DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OF OSWALD'S OBVIOUS GUILT
(times 2 murders).
**I'LL** believe near anything, Walt????
Stop! Please! I'll wet the keyboard if you don't stop!!
Anthony Marsh
> Don,
>
> That's not the point I was making re. LHO thinking the cops would be
> there asap.
>
> Oz couldn't have known it would take about 10 minutes to seal off the
> building. His mindset almost certainly was "I BETTER HAUL ASS, BECAUSE
> THE COPS WILL BE HERE VERY SOON SINCE I JUST FIRED THREE LOUD RIFLE
> SHOTS FROM HERE".
>
Just plain nuts. You have Oswald hauling ass by stopping to drink a Coke
in the lunch room and chatting with other employees.
And you seem to forget that he was apprehended by a cop within a minute
and a half.
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "He was curious about what the hell was happening because he left almost immediately to go see what was going on." <<<
>
> And then left the Plaza entirely a very few seconds later.
>
A few seconds?
Several other people left Dealey Plaza also. That makes them all suspects?
Walt
Pssst Dud..... Do you believe Dougherty?? Did Eddie Piper report
that he talked to Dougherty? Did Sanda Styles or Vicky Adams see Jack
Dougherty there on the first floor??
Walt
David Von Pein
===================================================
>>> "You have Oswald hauling ass by stopping to drink a Coke in the lunch room and chatting with other employees." <<<
Lots of skewed ideas there (in your attempts to slow Oz down on his
way out of the building).
Oswald bought a bottled beverage, yes. But there's no evidence that he
stopped to drink it in the lunchroom. In fact, there's evidence he
didn't drink ANY of the soda. Reid said the bottle was "full".
And I don't have Oz stopping to chat with employees. Walt The Kook
says Oz did that, without a shred of support to back it up. In fact,
there's support to the opposite end of that argument. No employee
claims to have seen or talked to LHO after the shooting at all.
>>> "And you seem to forget that he was apprehended by a cop within a minute and a half." <<<
"Apprehended"?? Hardly. He was detained for 10 seconds and then turned
loose. How is that being "apprehended"?
And Oswald probably was breathing a bit easier after his brief
encounter with Baker, as he realized that his status as a regular
worker in the building could easily get him out of the area quickly
without being "apprehended".
I think Oswald bought his beverage only after the Baker encounter
(after he began to "breathe easier", IMO) so as to appear calm and
unhurried. But he still left the building within a mere seconds of
buying the soft drink.
Another thought re. the Coke:
I'm trying to put myself into the shoes of an INNOCENT Oswald for just
a moment here (just to pretend for a minute) .... And I'm wondering,
under the circumstances of just having been stopped at gunpoint by a
policeman (a policeman who was obviously in a big rush, searching for
somebody in the building for some reason), if I would then have had a
desire to buy a Coke at the vending machine and casually (and
unhurriedly) waltz out the front door .... or: .... if I would (as an
innocent person) want to bypass the Coke machine and immediately find
somebody who could inform me what the hell was going on and why I was
just stopped at gunpoint by a Dallas cop.
Buying a Coke under those (innocent) circumstances might not be
TOTALLY crazy or out of the ordinary, I guess. It's just a little more
food for "Was He Really A Patsy?" thought.
Plus: If he's totally innocent and has no idea what's going on after
he was stopped by Officer Baker, why doesn't Oswald engage Mrs. Reid
in a little give-and-take re. the situation (esp. after she volunteers
info about the President being shot)?
Does Oswald ask her: How do you know that? Or: What else do you know?
No. He mumbles something she couldn't understand and slowly strolls to
the exit.
IMO, everything Lee Oswald did after 12:30 on 11/22 spells "I'm
Guilty"....right down to his "I Don't Care" attitude when he
encountered Baker and Reid just after the assassination.
More.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8845d85a86407d31
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/aaeb4a1389e69938
Walt
Hmmmm....You seem to have forgotten that Baker originally said that he
saw Lee in the lunch room "drinking a coke". Now perhaps Baker saw the
coke that Lee had just purchased and had it in his hand. That could
be called "drinking a coke" though Lee never actually had the bottle
to his lips when Baker burst into the lunchroom. Since you are having
trouble believing that Lee bought the coke AFTER Baker left the room
perhaps you should consider my contention....That lee already had the
coke when Baker entered the room.
Walt
Walt
Thats not the impression I got when I read Mrs Reid;s
testimony.....She didn't say he was "SLOWLY STROLLING" she said he was
walking and didn't even stop to talk .....
I think yer makin stuff up outta desperation.
Walt
David Von Pein
Nope. Just the one whose rifle and bullet shells were found on the 6th
Floor afterward. Plus the fact that Oz lied like a dog time and again
re. every single thing of a substantive nature concerning the details
of the crimes in question.
Were any OTHER people's guns and shells found on the sixth floor
(besides Oswald's)?
Didn't think so.
Bud
I don`t see where he relates anything of great significance.
> Did Eddie Piper report
> that he talked to Dougherty?
Dunno.
> Did Sanda Styles or Vicky Adams see Jack
> Dougherty there on the first floor??
Danny Acre said he ate with Doughtery in the Domino Room. Shelley
said he put Doughtery on guard duty on the first floor elevators.
These are both from memory, but I think they are both correct. There
is a lot more not known about the specific movements of the TSBD
employees than there is known. What is the point to these questions?
tomnln
Can you give a Citation of Oswald's Lies in a transcript of his
Interrogations?
Can you give a Citation of Oswald's Lies from a tape recording of thiose
Interrogations?
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1175563914.0...@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
If Oswald bought the coke After Baker seeing him,
HOW would Baker know he had a coke?
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/altgens.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1175561795.3...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
He didn't. And this (from your own website) proves it....
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/altgen9.jpg
That document was written by Burnett, not by Baker. Baker corrected
some stuff after he (Baker) read it over...and initialed the changes.
Your Coke theory is toast. And even if it wasn't toast (which it
is).....who the hell cares? It still doesn't get Oz off the murdering
hook. He could have bought that Coke before meeting Baker. We're only
talking maybe 15 seconds' difference in the timeline, tops. Still
easily doable by Oswald after coming down from the SN.
But keep on peddling it as "Baker's Lie", even though the document
with the Coke reference was obviously written in Agent Burnett's
handwriting.
dcwi...@netscape.net
Not unless he was told by his co-conspirators that the cops would run
first to the railroad yards. And SS Conspirator Sorrels was in the
car with Curry & Decker, as I recall, & might have led the Wild Goose
Charge to the knoll, with just a few well-spaced exclamations, maybe
fingerpointing to the overpass, for Jesse & Bill. Alternately, if
you're a LNer, & think he was (gasp) acting alone, he might have sat
back in the shadows for a moment & seen that most everyone was going
up San Juan Knoll.... And as I recall, Brennan said the shooter paused
for a moment, still in the sunlight, so another pause, in the shadows,
is not out of the question....
dw
dcwi...@netscape.net
colored....
>
> > > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > > > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
>
> > > Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> > > have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
>
> > Well, I lied--I did go back & do a little re-research. Edwards *did*
> > say "sport shirt" (11/22 statement). And Fischer told Deputy Lewis
> > "sport shirt", & Fischer himself said "sport shirt or T-shirt" in his
> > WC testimony (p194). And Rowland clinches it, because he testified,
> > He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
> > blue.... This was open at the collar. I think it was UNBUTTONED about
> > halfway, & then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt UNDER
> > this." (p171)
> > So Rowland sez the overshirt had buttons,
>
> Amazing that Rowland is about twice as far away as Brennan, and can
> make out buttons. This is where it becomes obvious that the witnesses
> are relating impressions. Look at the pictures of Oz in custody in his
> t-shirt, and say that the "v" shape of his t-shirt couldn`t look like
> a partially unbuttoned shirt from a distance.
I'm also suspicious of Rowland, because he said that the suspect was
standing back about 15 feet, & I think anyone 15 feet back on one of
the upper floors would not be visible, because of the shadows & the
boxes. In the photos of the upper floors, you can't see that far
back....
>
> > was open at the collar, & he
> > could see the T shirt under it. All three, then, said sport shirt or
> > *described* one.... And Brennan said the suspect "may have been
> > wearing a light-weight jacket or sweater"! (11/22/63 FBI statement)
>
> Yah, what color was the jacket Oz brought into work that morning.
> Was it light?
If it was (ie, his grey jacket), then y does the story to that he
picked it up afterwards, at the rooming house?
>
> > I think that, between them, the 5 witnesses rule out a suspect wearing
> > only a shirt of the "T" type, & they seem also to rule out Oswald's
> > rather dark arrest shirt (With Malice p408).
>
> I don`t think you can rule out the t-shirt. Some of these
> observations were made very casually, you don`t think Edwards or
> Fischer could accurately describe the people standing on either side
> of them, or any of the other dozens of people they may have spent a
> few moments looking at, do you? Context should be considered. I`ve
> never seen anything produced that shows just how accurate witnesses
> are when relating clothing.
I think you're changing the subject, slightly. This didn't start out
as a questioning of the reliability of witnesses, but as a discussion
of whether or not they all agreed, no matter if they were right or
wrong. Summing up: They did agree on light-colored clothing. One
said white, definitely; two, possibly. One said "very" lite colored.
But you seem to agree, as I think you'd have to, that O's dark arrest
shirt is ruled out. Which means, then, he had the presence of mind to
pick up the latter on the way out the building. Which means, then,
that, as per Jarman, the overshirt was in a "closet" on the first
floor (J said O worked in T shirt). Which means, then, that Baker saw
O as he went out the front door, as I've often maintained, because B
describes him in sleeves--a jacket or long-sleeved shirt.... Which
means, then, well, you know....
> > dw
> > > > The
> > > > collar was open at the neck,
>
> > > Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
> > > necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
>
> > Rowland said more than "open"--he said "unbuttoned"! ie, NOT a T
> > shirt!
>
> <snicker> Did he say how many buttons down the shirt was unbuttoned?
> This isn`t concrete, it`s mush.
I agree, Rowland's not a solid witness, but that's what he said, & if
you cite him, you can't say he said just "T shirt"....
> > > > and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> > > > beneath the light colored sport shirt.
>
> > > One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
>
> > Rowland *did* say that. But, no, they all didn't.
>
> Yah. And Walt needs to be taught to stop phrasing his assertions
> like he does. He does it dishonestly, to make his points seem
> stronger, and I intend to call him on it.
> >
If he was going on recollections, I'd excuse him, since they did all
say "light colored"
SLASH
tomnln
Tell us where Burnett got it from?
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/altgen9.jpg
How come you didn't reply to Naker's 2 positions when he spotted Oswald?
How come you didn't reply to the 3 positions Oswald was in when Baker
spotted him?
Your side LIED Time After Time.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1175573968.2...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
> MORE RE. OSWALD'S MOVEMENTS FOLLOWING THE ASSASSINATION:
>
> ===================================================
>
>>>> "You have Oswald hauling ass by stopping to drink a Coke in the lunch room and chatting with other employees." <<<
>
> Lots of skewed ideas there (in your attempts to slow Oz down on his
> way out of the building).
>
> Oswald bought a bottled beverage, yes. But there's no evidence that he
> stopped to drink it in the lunchroom. In fact, there's evidence he
> didn't drink ANY of the soda. Reid said the bottle was "full".
>
Show us your proof that Oswald bought a bottle beverage and prove when
he bought it. Every time you challenge something that a conspiracy
believer asserts the same type of challenge can be thrown back at you
and you are in the same position as the conspiracy believers.
> And I don't have Oz stopping to chat with employees. Walt The Kook
> says Oz did that, without a shred of support to back it up. In fact,
> there's support to the opposite end of that argument. No employee
> claims to have seen or talked to LHO after the shooting at all.
>
And he could cite witnesses saying that equal to your claim that Oswald
bought a bottled beverage. What the Hell do you think makes your
position perfect and everyone else's impossible when we are ALL using
the same source of evidence?
>>>> "And you seem to forget that he was apprehended by a cop within a minute and a half." <<<
>
> "Apprehended"?? Hardly. He was detained for 10 seconds and then turned
> loose. How is that being "apprehended"?
>
Apprehended to fulfill your requirement that an assassin be caught.
Oswald was caught and then let go. Just as the grassy knoll gunman was
caught and then let go.
> And Oswald probably was breathing a bit easier after his brief
> encounter with Baker, as he realized that his status as a regular
> worker in the building could easily get him out of the area quickly
> without being "apprehended".
>
Oh yeah, he got out quickly. After stopping to talk to other employees
and determining that there would be no more work that day.
> I think Oswald bought his beverage only after the Baker encounter
> (after he began to "breathe easier", IMO) so as to appear calm and
> unhurried. But he still left the building within a mere seconds of
> buying the soft drink.
>
Prove it. Prove with documentary evidence exactly when Oswald bought his
drink. And ignore Baker's statement that Oswald had a Coke in his hand.
Baker must have just been imagining that, right?
> Another thought re. the Coke:
>
> I'm trying to put myself into the shoes of an INNOCENT Oswald for just
> a moment here (just to pretend for a minute) .... And I'm wondering,
> under the circumstances of just having been stopped at gunpoint by a
> policeman (a policeman who was obviously in a big rush, searching for
> somebody in the building for some reason), if I would then have had a
> desire to buy a Coke at the vending machine and casually (and
> unhurriedly) waltz out the front door .... or: .... if I would (as an
> innocent person) want to bypass the Coke machine and immediately find
> somebody who could inform me what the hell was going on and why I was
> just stopped at gunpoint by a Dallas cop.
>
Then why don't you put yourself in the shoes of a GUILTY Oswald for just
a moment? He did not have a screwdriver and no screwdriver was found on
the sixth floor, so he had to use a specially trimmed down dime to
reassemble his rifle. Obviously he knew about the FBI lab's ability to
identify tool marks and link the dime to his rifle, so he used that dime
to buy a Coke, ONLY to get rid of the incriminating evidence. You're
welcome.
> Buying a Coke under those (innocent) circumstances might not be
> TOTALLY crazy or out of the ordinary, I guess. It's just a little more
> food for "Was He Really A Patsy?" thought.
>
It really doesn't matter. No matter what routine activity Oswald
performed, die-hard WC defenders will cite it as proof of his guilt.
Such as leaving behind the money for his wife. Or leaving his wedding
ring. Or getting a bus transfer. Or combing his hair. Or wearing a T-shirt.
> Plus: If he's totally innocent and has no idea what's going on after
> he was stopped by Officer Baker, why doesn't Oswald engage Mrs. Reid
> in a little give-and-take re. the situation (esp. after she volunteers
> info about the President being shot)?
>
> Does Oswald ask her: How do you know that? Or: What else do you know?
>
> No. He mumbles something she couldn't understand and slowly strolls to
> the exit.
>
> IMO, everything Lee Oswald did after 12:30 on 11/22 spells "I'm
> Guilty"....right down to his "I Don't Care" attitude when he
> encountered Baker and Reid just after the assassination.
>
All that bull doesn't matter. You would say that everything he did since
he was born points to his guilt.
David Von Pein
Well, it's pretty well "proven" that Oswald must have bought a
beverage (Reid sees a full Coke in his hands as he comes from the
lunchroom area).
It's reasonable to assume, therefore, that Oswald probably didn't just
HAPPEN across a discarded full Coke bottle, or that he broke into the
vending machine by force and stole the soda without paying (although,
yes, he was a cheapskate to rival Jack Benny).
The "when" question is slightly in doubt....but not much. Truly saw
nothing in Oz's hands. And neither did Baker. But, grain of salt
required there...because it's possible they just didn't notice
anything in his hands in that 10-second encounter.
Doesn't really matter TOO much. Oz still had time to get his Coke
before the Baker meeting. Not much time, true. But it was
doable...esp. since we have no idea how fast Oz was hoofing it down
those stairs at 12:31.
>>> "What the Hell do you think makes your position perfect and everyone else's impossible when we are ALL using the same source of evidence?" <<<
Because......
1.) I am not a CT-Kook.
2.) I evaluate the evidence properly (i.e., I'm not constantly
thinking that extraordinary things are occurring, when ordinary ones
probably are).
3.) I am God Himself (and I know all). ;)
4.) I am not a CT-Kook.
That's why.
Next?....
>>> "Oh yeah, he got out quickly. After stopping to talk to other employees and determining that there would be no more work that day." <<<
Oh, so you're taking Oswald at his word, huh? Great idea....let's
believe everything uttered by the accused killer. That's always wise
(esp. when the accused is trying to establish an alibi or trying to
explain away why he left at 12:33).
What employees said they chatted with Oswald after 12:30, btw? Can you
cite just one?
Didn't think so.
>>> "And ignore Baker's statement that Oswald had a Coke in his hand." <<<
But Baker didn't write that Sept. 1964 document. Agent Burnett wrote
it.
Are you saying the word "Coke" here is in Baker's own writing? (It
isn't.).....
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/altgen9.jpg
>>> "Then why don't you put yourself in the shoes of a GUILTY Oswald for just a moment? He did not have a screwdriver and no screwdriver was found on the sixth floor, so he had to use a specially trimmed down dime to reassemble his rifle. Obviously he knew about the FBI lab's ability to identify tool marks and link the dime to his rifle, so he used that dime to buy a Coke, ONLY to get rid of the incriminating evidence. You're welcome." <<<
That's actually not too bad. It sounds somewhat reasonable in fact.
However, since Oz surely is going to know that somebody just might
very well see him with a "full" bottle of Coke as he comes from the
area of the TSBD where such beverages are purchased on the 2nd Floor
(and Reid did)....don't you think Oz might think the FBI would search
the soda machine for the deposited "trimmed dime" (and maybe even get
a fingerprint off of it)?
It would have been better for Oswald to either throw the dime in the
trash as he left the TSBD...or, even better still, to simply toss it
away someplace after he left the building as he headed east on Elm to
catch the bus.
But I like your "dime"/"Coke" theory though. Hadn't heard that one
before.
>>> "You would say that everything he did since he was born points to his guilt." <<<
Nah. Just the things he did on November 22nd, 1963 (and April 10th,
1963, too).
Bud
That was incidental to my point in this exchange. Walt states as
fact that Oz was wearing a brown shirt at the time of the
assassination. He states that these men said the man they saw in the
6th floor was wearing white (not as a possibility, but as a statement
of fact). These things are unestablished, so any attempt to assert
them as fact is a lie. Walt does this all the time, so I`ll just keep
calling it a lie all the time, until he stops this practice.
> > > > > Rowland, Fischer, and Edwards all described
> > > > > the light colored shirt as being a sport shirt with a collar.
> >
> > > > Another lie, they all did not. Fischer specifically said it could
> > > > have been a t-shirt, have you ever seen a t-shirt with a collar?
> >
> > > Well, I lied--I did go back & do a little re-research. Edwards *did*
> > > say "sport shirt" (11/22 statement). And Fischer told Deputy Lewis
> > > "sport shirt", & Fischer himself said "sport shirt or T-shirt" in his
> > > WC testimony (p194). And Rowland clinches it, because he testified,
> > > He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light
> > > blue.... This was open at the collar. I think it was UNBUTTONED about
> > > halfway, & then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt UNDER
> > > this." (p171)
> > > So Rowland sez the overshirt had buttons,
> >
> > Amazing that Rowland is about twice as far away as Brennan, and can
> > make out buttons. This is where it becomes obvious that the witnesses
> > are relating impressions. Look at the pictures of Oz in custody in his
> > t-shirt, and say that the "v" shape of his t-shirt couldn`t look like
> > a partially unbuttoned shirt from a distance.
>
> I'm also suspicious of Rowland, because he said that the suspect was
> standing back about 15 feet, & I think anyone 15 feet back on one of
> the upper floors would not be visible, because of the shadows & the
> boxes. In the photos of the upper floors, you can't see that far
> back....
I don`t see this having an effect on his believability, it may have
seemed the man he saw was back that far, but wasn`t really. I haven`t
checked, but I`ve heard it said that Rowland was twice as far away
from the TSBD as Brennan. Brennan was 122 feet away from the Sniper
Nest Window. If what I remember is correct, that puts Rowland about
250 away the 6th floor windows. So, from that distance, his shirt
description is well within the realm of possiblility of being a t-
shirt, to my mind.
> > > was open at the collar, & he
> > > could see the T shirt under it. All three, then, said sport shirt or
> > > *described* one.... And Brennan said the suspect "may have been
> > > wearing a light-weight jacket or sweater"! (11/22/63 FBI statement)
> >
> > Yah, what color was the jacket Oz brought into work that morning.
> > Was it light?
>
> If it was (ie, his grey jacket), then y does the story to that he
> picked it up afterwards, at the rooming house?
I was thinking of another jacket, one that was found in the domino
room a week or so after the assassination. I thought it was determined
to be the jacket Oz wore into work that morning.
> > > I think that, between them, the 5 witnesses rule out a suspect wearing
> > > only a shirt of the "T" type, & they seem also to rule out Oswald's
> > > rather dark arrest shirt (With Malice p408).
> >
> > I don`t think you can rule out the t-shirt. Some of these
> > observations were made very casually, you don`t think Edwards or
> > Fischer could accurately describe the people standing on either side
> > of them, or any of the other dozens of people they may have spent a
> > few moments looking at, do you? Context should be considered. I`ve
> > never seen anything produced that shows just how accurate witnesses
> > are when relating clothing.
>
> I think you're changing the subject, slightly. This didn't start out
> as a questioning of the reliability of witnesses, but as a discussion
> of whether or not they all agreed, no matter if they were right or
> wrong.
I don`t agree, but won`t pursue the distinction.
> Summing up: They did agree on light-colored clothing. One
> said white, definitely; two, possibly. One said "very" lite colored.
> But you seem to agree, as I think you'd have to, that O's dark arrest
> shirt is ruled out.
Tricky to say "ruled out" in the context of their observations. I
don`t notice clothes much at all when observing people, so I have a
hard time believing others do it at all, let alone do it well. I will
go as far as to say that the evidence strongly indicates the man on
the 6th floor was at least wearing light colored upper clothing.
> Which means, then, he had the presence of mind to
> pick up the latter on the way out the building.
I think Oz visited the domino room before leaving.
> Which means, then,
> that, as per Jarman, the overshirt was in a "closet" on the first
> floor (J said O worked in T shirt).
Were there lockers in the domino room?
> Which means, then, that Baker saw
> O as he went out the front door, as I've often maintained, because B
> describes him in sleeves--a jacket or long-sleeved shirt.... Which
> means, then, well, you know....
I like the idea that Baker got the impression of the brown shirt
from seeing him in the police station after Oz was arrested.
> > > dw
> > > > > The
> > > > > collar was open at the neck,
> >
> > > > Another lie. They said the shirt was open necked in various ways. V-
> > > > necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck.
> >
> > > Rowland said more than "open"--he said "unbuttoned"! ie, NOT a T
> > > shirt!
> >
> > <snicker> Did he say how many buttons down the shirt was unbuttoned?
> > This isn`t concrete, it`s mush.
>
> I agree, Rowland's not a solid witness, but that's what he said, & if
> you cite him, you can't say he said just "T shirt"....
What I said was "They said the shirt was open in various ways. V-
necked t-shirts like the one Oz was wearing are open at the neck".
(With Walt`s help, I`ve since determined that the t-shirt Oz was
wearing wasthe standard kind, not v-necked.) So, I am not claiming all
that all the parts of their discriptions are covered by a t-shirt,
only the "openned neck" aspect is consistant with the t-shirt Oz was
wearing that day..
A quick question, dw, do you know where I can find the FBI
interviews of the witnesses online?
Walt
Hey Dud I'm glad you called my attention to Oswald's T-
shirt ......There are many photos of Oswald in custody. During the
early hours of his incarceration the neck on his T-Shirt was not
stretched and did not look like a Vee neck T-shirt. look at the Bill
Winfrey photo where Oswald is raising his handcuffed hands and showing
that the shirt he's wearing doesn't have a hole in the right elbow,
and notice that the neck of the T-shirt is not stretched. How do you
suppose the neck of that shirt got so badly streched while he was in
custody?
Walt
A quick question, dw, do you know where I can find the FBI
interviews of the witnesses online?
>
>
>
> > > > > > and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> > > > > > beneath the light colored sport shirt.
>
> > > > > One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
>
> > > > Rowland *did* say that. But, no, they all didn't.
>
> > > Yah. And Walt needs to be taught to stop phrasing his assertions
> > > like he does. He does it dishonestly, to make his points seem
> > > stronger, and I intend to call him on it.
>
> > If he was going on recollections, I'd excuse him, since they did all
> > say "light colored"
>
> > SLASH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
What would you do without me to explain these simple things to you?
The material isn`t different, it just appears different in different
picyures, because it is hanging on his frame differently.
Walt
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes that's what I said..... It ( the neck band ) appears different in
different photos.
In the early photos it appears to be unstretched and somewhat snug
around the neck, but in later pictures (the ones that show a lot of
bruising) the neck band is baddly stretched. That stretching is the
reason you thought it was a Vee neck T-shirt. Can you explain how it
could have gotten stretched so badly?
Walt
Bud
The fabric is flexible, so it moves around. Being a loose fit, it
appears different depending on a variety of factors. Certainly it
can`t be determined that it has been altered on the basis of it
looking different in different photos. But, if you want to present
such a theory, all you need to do is compile all the photos of Oz
where the t-shirt is visable and document when each photo was taken.
Then maybe it can be determined if your theory has any merit.
> Walt
Walt
Oh, You've already acknowledged that the neck band appearts different
in different photos...."The material isn`t different, it just appears
different in different picyures, ...
That's not the question...... the question is: Can you explain how
it could have gotten stretched so badly?
Walt
Walt
I guess you don't have the guts to answer the question........ Well
Ok. Let's look at something else that you uncovered.
You said the neck band appears different in different photos, and I
agree with that observation. It is not stretched in the early photos,
but it later photos it is very obviously stretched, and it is also
torn below Oswald's left ear. Since you thought he was wearing a Vee
neck T-shirt based on that stretched neckband, I don't understand how
you could have arrived at your idea that it could have been Oswald who
was wearing a light colored open necked sport shirt with a collar.
Since Oswald's T-shirt was not stretched so that you could mistake it
for a Vee necked T-shirt then it's obvious that the man in the light
colored sport shirt was not Oswald.
Walt
Bud
You assume something you haven`t proven, that it is stretched.
> Well
> Ok. Let's look at something else that you uncovered.
>
> You said the neck band appears different in different photos, and I
> agree with that observation. It is not stretched in the early photos,
> but it later photos it is very obviously stretched, and it is also
> torn below Oswald's left ear. Since you thought he was wearing a Vee
> neck T-shirt based on that stretched neckband,
Did I ever say I thought it was stretched, idiot?
> I don't understand how
> you could have arrived at your idea that it could have been Oswald who
> was wearing a light colored open necked sport shirt with a collar.
I never siad he was. I said the t-shirt Oz was wearing could be
mistaken for one from a distance.
> Since Oswald's T-shirt was not stretched so that you could mistake it
> for a Vee necked T-shirt then it's obvious that the man in the light
> colored sport shirt was not Oswald.
You haven`t established the t-shirt neck to be stretched. It seems
to me to be an oversized t-shirt for Oz`s slender frame, with an
oversized head openning, which causes the excess material to droop
down. That it appears differently in different pictures can be
explained by the fact that sometimes the same thing can look different
in different pictures. Especially clothing, that shifts around the
body.
> Walt
dcwi...@netscape.net
At one point, the Warren Report (p125) itself suggests as much:
Oswald "continued wearing the same shirt which he was wearing ALL
MORNING & which he was STILL wearing when arrested" (emphasis mine).
Skimming the report, one might justifiably conclude that it concluded
that he was wearing the brown shirt while shooting, but a few
paragraphs later, they ratchet things *down* a bit, a finish with just
"the fibers [in the rifle] most probably came from O's shirt.... the
Commission was unable to reach any firm conclusion as to WHEN the
fibers were caught in the rifle". So there. I guess. Inconclusive,
isn't it? if I may paraphrase Mr Avery....
dw
He states that these men said the man they saw in the
> 6th floor was wearing white (not as a possibility, but as a statement
> of fact). These things are unestablished, so any attempt to assert
> them as fact is a lie. Walt does this all the time, so I`ll just keep
> calling it a lie all the time, until he stops this practice.
>
Well, the Weaver Polaroid shows that there was someone all in white up
there just before 12:30, tho I hesitate to cite the floor on which
this person in white was....
But it was a *darker blue*
>
>
>
>
> > > > I think that, between them, the 5 witnesses rule out a suspect wearing
> > > > only a shirt of the "T" type, & they seem also to rule out Oswald's
> > > > rather dark arrest shirt (With Malice p408).
>
> > > I don`t think you can rule out the t-shirt. Some of these
> > > observations were made very casually, you don`t think Edwards or
> > > Fischer could accurately describe the people standing on either side
> > > of them, or any of the other dozens of people they may have spent a
> > > few moments looking at, do you? Context should be considered. I`ve
> > > never seen anything produced that shows just how accurate witnesses
> > > are when relating clothing.
>
> > I think you're changing the subject, slightly. This didn't start out
> > as a questioning of the reliability of witnesses, but as a discussion
> > of whether or not they all agreed, no matter if they were right or
> > wrong.
>
> I don`t agree, but won`t pursue the distinction.
>
> > Summing up: They did agree on light-colored clothing. One
> > said white, definitely; two, possibly. One said "very" lite colored.
> > But you seem to agree, as I think you'd have to, that O's dark arrest
> > shirt is ruled out.
>
> Tricky to say "ruled out" in the context of their observations. I
> don`t notice clothes much at all when observing people, so I have a
> hard time believing others do it at all, let alone do it well. I will
> go as far as to say that the evidence strongly indicates the man on
> the 6th floor was at least wearing light colored upper clothing.
>
Agreed, tho the Weaver photo suggests a *different* floor....
> > Which means, then, he had the presence of mind to
> > pick up the latter on the way out the building.
>
> I think Oz visited the domino room before leaving.
>
> > Which means, then,
> > that, as per Jarman, the overshirt was in a "closet" on the first
> > floor (J said O worked in T shirt).
>
> Were there lockers in the domino room?
I think closer to the elevators, but on the same side of the first
floor
No. I forget where I got them. Various places I think...
>
> > > > > > and the man was wearing a white T-shirt
> > > > > > beneath the light colored sport shirt.
>
> > > > > One of them may have said that. They all didn`t.
>
> > > > Rowland *did* say that. But, no, they all didn't.
>
> > > Yah. And Walt needs to be taught to stop phrasing his assertions
> > > like he does. He does it dishonestly, to make his points seem
> > > stronger, and I intend to call him on it.
>
> > If he was going on recollections, I'd excuse him, since they did all
> > say "light colored"
>
> > SLASH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
How could they determine that. The rifle may have caught his shirt
as he was placing in the paper bag, before taling it to work, or
during the assembling process.
> So there. I guess. Inconclusive,
> isn't it?
Yah, I think the evidence indicates Oz was wearing just his t-
shirt when he was seen on the 6th floor. The descriptions of the open
neck light shirt seems close to the way Oz`s t-shirt looks in many
photos, and the other physical descriptions are either dead on, or
close to Oz also.
> if I may paraphrase Mr Avery....
> dw
>
> He states that these men said the man they saw in the
> > 6th floor was wearing white (not as a possibility, but as a statement
> > of fact). These things are unestablished, so any attempt to assert
> > them as fact is a lie. Walt does this all the time, so I`ll just keep
> > calling it a lie all the time, until he stops this practice.
> >
> Well, the Weaver Polaroid shows that there was someone all in white up
> there just before 12:30, tho I hesitate to cite the floor on which
> this person in white was....
Posiible the person wasn`t the one these wirtnesses observed and
described.
Yah, I looked it up, it`s CE 163, seen here...
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=138189
That pretty much shoots down this jacket as a possibility.
I`m not familiar with that photo. The person must be unclear, no?
> > > Which means, then, he had the presence of mind to
> > > pick up the latter on the way out the building.
> >
> > I think Oz visited the domino room before leaving.
> >
> > > Which means, then,
> > > that, as per Jarman, the overshirt was in a "closet" on the first
> > > floor (J said O worked in T shirt).
> >
> > Were there lockers in the domino room?
>
> I think closer to the elevators, but on the same side of the first
> floor
I always though Oz stopped in the Domino room before leaving the
TSBD. There is a newsman who said it might have been Oz who gave him
directions to the phone. Could have caught him traversing the first
floor between the lockers and the domino room.
Then thats where I`ll look...
Walt
The point is.....The lyin bastards wanted to have it both
ways.....They wanted to make it appear that Oswald was guilty because
the information they released to the press on 11/23/63 said that they
found fresh fibers from the shirt he was wearing at the time of the
shooting. Clearly they were implying that Oswald had the rifle
against his shoulder while he was wearing that shirt....... That was
the story on 11/ 23 / 63
We now know that Lee went to his room and changed his shirt at
1:00pm. So if the FBI found "fresh"fibers that matched the shirt he
was wearing at THE TIME OF HIS ARREST those fibers had to have gotten
on the rifle AFTER both Oswald and the rifle were in the hands of the
police.
The lyin bastards still want to have it both ways.....They want us to
believe that Oswald shed his brown shirt for just a few minutes while
he was firing the rifle and then put it back on again afterward.
Which totally ignores the FACT that the FBI said the fibers matched a
different shirt. The FBI described the fibers as "dark blue", "gray/
black" and "orange/yellow". Does the color of those fibers sound like
the came from a reddish Brown shirt with flecks of white in it??
Then the liars attempt to make Oswald's T-shirt into a "Light colored
sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar". Because several eye
witnesses on the street in front of the TSBD saw a man behind the
sixth floor windows and they described the mans shirt as "Light
colored sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar", which was
open at the neck and his T-shirt was visible.
There is just no end to the lies of the Lner's. As a wise man once
said...... It's far better to tell the truth and suffer the
consequences, than to lie and then have to keep lying to support your
original lie, until you yourself have blackened your soul to the point
where you no longer know truth.
Walt.
Walt
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId...
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Quote them saying that the fibers were transferred at the time of
the shooting.
> That was
> the story on 11/ 23 / 63
>
> We now know that Lee went to his room and changed his shirt at
> 1:00pm.
No, we don`t know that. Do you have a witness who was inside the
room while Oz changed?
> So if the FBI found "fresh"fibers that matched the shirt he
> was wearing at THE TIME OF HIS ARREST those fibers had to have gotten
> on the rifle AFTER both Oswald and the rifle were in the hands of the
> police.
No, he was wearing CE150 when he stayed at the Paines, when he went
to work, when he went to the boardinghouse, and when he was arrested.
> The lyin bastards still want to have it both ways.....They want us to
> believe that Oswald shed his brown shirt for just a few minutes while
> he was firing the rifle and then put it back on again afterward.
How do you know this didn`t happen? What witnesses do you have to
Oz in a brown shirt prior to the assassination?
> Which totally ignores the FACT that the FBI said the fibers matched a
> different shirt. The FBI described the fibers as "dark blue", "gray/
> black" and "orange/yellow". Does the color of those fibers sound like
> the came from a reddish Brown shirt with flecks of white in it??
It is immaterial how this evidence sounds to you. In what
meaningful way have you established that threads of those colors could
not be found in this shirt?
> Then the liars attempt to make Oswald's T-shirt into a "Light colored
> sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar".
I see you put this information in quotes. What witness are you
quoting?
> Because several eye
> witnesses on the street in front of the TSBD saw a man behind the
> sixth floor windows and they described the mans shirt as "Light
> colored sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar",
Quote several witnesses saying this.
> which was
> open at the neck and his T-shirt was visible.
One witness mentioned an undershirt, the witness who was furthest
away.
> There is just no end to the lies of the Lner's. As a wise man once
> said...... It's far better to tell the truth and suffer the
> consequences, than to lie and then have to keep lying to support your
> original lie, until you yourself have blackened your soul to the point
> where you no longer know truth.
Thats about where you are now. Everything you claim to know about
this case is wrong.
Walt
butt of the rifle that matched the shirt Oswald was wearing when he
was arrested.
It's true he did NOT say they were transferred at the time of the
shooting.....He didn't have to, the implication was clear.
> > That was
> > the story on 11/ 23 / 63
>
> > We now know that Lee went to his room and changed his shirt at
> > 1:00pm.
>
> No, we don`t know that. Do you have a witness who was inside the
> room while Oz changed?
Well perhaps you don't.... When I said "we" I was referring to
reasonable people with commonsense.
> > So if the FBI found "fresh"fibers that matched the shirt he
> > was wearing at THE TIME OF HIS ARREST those fibers had to have gotten
> > on the rifle AFTER both Oswald and the rifle were in the hands of the
> > police.
>
> No, he was wearing CE150 when he stayed at the Paines, when he went
> to work, when he went to the boardinghouse, and when he was arrested.
>
> > The lyin bastards still want to have it both ways.....They want us to
> > believe that Oswald shed his brown shirt for just a few minutes while
> > he was firing the rifle and then put it back on again afterward.
>
> How do you know this didn`t happen? What witnesses do you have to
> Oz in a brown shirt prior to the assassination?
I know it did NOT happen because the physical description of the
gunman that Howard Brennan gave did NOT fit Oswald
And the DESCRIPTIONS of the man's clothing which was given by several
witnesses who saw the gunman behind windows on the sixth floor. Those
descriptions did NOT match the clothing that Oswald was wearing at the
time. There simply is NO evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor
at the time the shots were fired.
>
> > Which totally ignores the FACT that the FBI said the fibers matched a
> > different shirt. The FBI described the fibers as "dark blue", "gray/
> > black" and "orange/yellow". Does the color of those fibers sound like
> > the came from a reddish Brown shirt with flecks of white in it??
>
> It is immaterial how this evidence sounds to you. In what
> meaningful way have you established that threads of those colors could
> not be found in this shirt?
When I said "we" I was referring to reasonable people with
commonsense.
>
> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/rus...
>
> > Then the liars attempt to make Oswald's T-shirt into a "Light colored
> > sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar".
>
> I see you put this information in quotes. What witness are you
> quoting?
>
> > Because several eye
> > witnesses on the street in front of the TSBD saw a man behind the
> > sixth floor windows and they described the mans shirt as "Light
> > colored sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar",
>
> Quote several witnesses saying this.
>
> > which was
> > open at the neck and his T-shirt was visible.
>
> One witness mentioned an undershirt, the witness who was furthest
> away.
Immaterial..... Rowland said the man's light colored sport shirt was
unbuttoned about half way and he could see his T-shirt.
Walt
window of the sixth floor.
Brennan was about 150 feet from the south WEST corner window and
Rowland estimated the distance from his position to the south WEST
corner window as about 175 feet.....which isn't a bad guess. Rowland
was across Houston street about 35 or 40 feet from Brennan.
Walt
Bud
In what way could Wade have conveyed that information that would
have prevented idiots from perceiving that implication?
> > > That was
> > > the story on 11/ 23 / 63
> >
> > > We now know that Lee went to his room and changed his shirt at
> > > 1:00pm.
> >
> > No, we don`t know that. Do you have a witness who was inside the
> > room while Oz changed?
>
> Well perhaps you don't.... When I said "we" I was referring to
> reasonable people with commonsense.
In other words, you make an assumption, and consider it a fact.
> > > So if the FBI found "fresh"fibers that matched the shirt he
> > > was wearing at THE TIME OF HIS ARREST those fibers had to have gotten
> > > on the rifle AFTER both Oswald and the rifle were in the hands of the
> > > police.
> >
> > No, he was wearing CE150 when he stayed at the Paines, when he went
> > to work, when he went to the boardinghouse, and when he was arrested.
> >
> > > The lyin bastards still want to have it both ways.....They want us to
> > > believe that Oswald shed his brown shirt for just a few minutes while
> > > he was firing the rifle and then put it back on again afterward.
> >
> > How do you know this didn`t happen? What witnesses do you have to
> > Oz in a brown shirt prior to the assassination?
>
> I know it did NOT happen because the physical description of the
> gunman that Howard Brennan gave did NOT fit Oswald
It wasn`t off by that much.
> And the DESCRIPTIONS of the man's clothing which was given by several
> witnesses who saw the gunman behind windows on the sixth floor. Those
> descriptions did NOT match the clothing that Oswald was wearing at the
> time.
Again, you make an assumption, and consider it a fact.
> There simply is NO evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor
> at the time the shots were fired.
Other than an eyewitness who said he saw him there. And don`t
bother misrepresenting Brennan`s description once more. There is
nothing Brennnan said that rules out Oz as the man he saw.
> > > Which totally ignores the FACT that the FBI said the fibers matched a
> > > different shirt. The FBI described the fibers as "dark blue", "gray/
> > > black" and "orange/yellow". Does the color of those fibers sound like
> > > the came from a reddish Brown shirt with flecks of white in it??
> >
> > It is immaterial how this evidence sounds to you. In what
> > meaningful way have you established that threads of those colors could
> > not be found in this shirt?
>
> When I said "we" I was referring to reasonable people with
> commonsense.
Since you didn`t examine the shirt, your opinions about the fibers
the shirt can be comprised of is meaningless. Like most of what you
say.
> > http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/rus...
> >
> > > Then the liars attempt to make Oswald's T-shirt into a "Light colored
> > > sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar".
> >
> > I see you put this information in quotes. What witness are you
> > quoting?
Well, Walt, what witness gave the description "Light colored sport
shirt, with a button front, and a collor". Caught you lying again,
didn`t I.
> > > Because several eye
> > > witnesses on the street in front of the TSBD saw a man behind the
> > > sixth floor windows and they described the mans shirt as "Light
> > > colored sport shirt, with a button front, and a collar",
> >
> > Quote several witnesses saying this.
Nothing, Walt? Why do you insist in misrepresenting the evidence
so? You call the WC lying bastards, yet all you do is lie about the
evidence.
> > > which was
> > > open at the neck and his T-shirt was visible.
> >
> > One witness mentioned an undershirt, the witness who was furthest
> > away.
>
> Immaterial.....
Yah, I know FACTS are immaterial to you. You perfer your own
twisting of information.
>Rowland said the man's light colored sport shirt was
> unbuttoned about half way and he could see his T-shirt.
Of course that isn`t what he said.