Brennan's Clothing description
tomnln
Then, WHY didn't they include Brennan's description of the shooter's
CLOTHING?
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:uO2dnaUH9ctyoLvb...@comcast.com...
> eric_r_carlson wrote:
>> Thanks for your input Anthony, citations would have helped, but I am
>> glad to get your input.
>>
>> Here is what I've been able to dig up. The Warren Report, stated that
>> the radio alert sent at "approximately 12:45 p.m." was based "most
>> probably" on information that had been provided by Howard L. Brennan,
>> an eye witness who had an eye view of about a 100-foot-away from the
>> 6th floor window at the time of the shooting.
>>
>> The 12:45 description based on Brennan's account was basically as
>> follows: look for a slender white male, about 30 years old, 5 feet 10
>> inches and weighing about 165 pounds.
>>
>
> I am not sure that the radio description had to be based on Brennan's
> account. Even if it was Brennan only caught a fleeting glimpse and did not
> see all of the shooter. It could have been a different witness and a
> different shooter. But either way the description is close enough to
> Oswald.
>
>> Oswald was actually 150 lbs.
>> Warren Commission Hearings Vol. XXVI, p. 521
>>
>> His Military record had him at about 131 to 150 lbs. (if Martin posted
>> this correctly which I'm assuming he did)
>> http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/MS/mil.html
>>
>> This should sufficiently debunk my friend.
>>
>> About the limo- what evidence do we have that debunks the bullet hole
>> in the windshield? Thanks!
>>
>
> See my article. The evidence photo taken only hours later shows only a
> crack, no hole. The Altgens photo shows no hole. Ferguson saw no hole.
>
> http://the-puzzle-palace.com/bestwitn.htm
> http://the-puzzle-palace.com/windshield.htm
>
>
Walt
> In case McAdams don't post this one.
>
> Then, WHY didn't they include Brennan's description of the shooter's
> CLOTHING?
Good question..... But they may have thought the gunman could alter
his appearance by simply putting on a jack and hat, and therefore a
clothing description wouldn't have been all that useful.
I think it's logical that Brennan was the source for the first
description that was broadcast of the killer. Within a few minutes of
the shooting he had got the attention of a DPD officer had told him
that he had seen a man firing a rifle from a window, on an upper floor
of the TSBD. In his affidavit he wrote that he felt he could identify
the man he's seen firing a rifle from the window if he ever saw him
again. That indicates that he knew what the man looked like and
therefore he could have gave the cop a description. Since Brennan
probably was the first eye witness to make contact with the police
after the shooting it's logical that the description that was
broadcast came from Howard Brennan. That description...White
male...in his early thirties...about 5' 10" ...slender, weighing about
165 pounds.... only superficially fit Oswald. He was a slender white
male, and that's about all of the description that fit Oswald. There
were probably hundreds of other "slender white males" in the vicinity
who actually were in their early thirties, who weighed close to 165
pounds and were 5 ' 10" tall.
At about the time ( 12:45) that the description of the gunman was
being broadcast, inspector Sawyer was transmitting a description to
headquarters that included the information that the the gunman was
armed with a "30-30 or some type of Winchester". Obviously a 30-30
is a sporting or hunting rifle and NOT a Mannlicher Carcano, nor could
it be mistaken for a Carcano, or any other military rifle.
When Brennan testified before the Warren Commission had said had seen
a man STANDING UP and aiming a rifle out of a sixth floor window. He
said he could "see all of the barrel of the rifle" as the man aimed it
out of the window. Brennan's description fits a hunting rifle much
better than it fits a military rifle.
According to Arnold Rowland There was a gunman on the sixth floor with
a hunting rifle just before the shooting.
Arnold Rowland said that he had seen a man who was wearing a light
colored sprort shirt, standing back from the wide open window at the
WEST end of the sixth floor, and the man had a hunting rifle with a
powerful scope on it in his hands.
Amos Euins also saw the long metal barrel of a rifle sticking out of a
window of the TSBD, Euins described it as a "pipe like thing"
Though only one witness described the rifle as a hunting rifle, it
seems likely that Inspector Sawyer got the impression that the weapon
was a hunting rifle while listening to a witness who very likely was
Howard Brennan. Whatever the case NONE of the witnesses described a
rifle that could have been a Mannlicher Carcano.
Walt
The only characteristic t
>
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >http://the-puzzle-palace.com/windshield.htm- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Todd W. Vaughan
> On 19 Apr, 00:12, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In case McAdams don't post this one.
>
> > Then, WHY didn't they include Brennan's description of the shooter's
> > CLOTHING?
>
> Good question..... But they may have thought the gunman could alter
> his appearance by simply putting on a jack and hat, and therefore a
> clothing description wouldn't have been all that useful.
>
> I think it's logical that Brennan was the source for the first
> description that was broadcast of the killer. Within a few minutes of
> the shooting he had got the attention of a DPD officer had told him
> that he had seen a man firing a rifle from a window, on an upper floor
> of the TSBD. In his affidavit he wrote that he felt he could identify
> the man he's seen firing a rifle from the window if he ever saw him
> again. T
He also said in his affadavit that the man he saw was in a window "in
the east end of [sic] the building and the second row of windows from
the top" not the WEST end of the builidng as you claim.
>hat indicates that he knew what the man looked like and
> therefore he could have gave the cop a description. Since Brennan
> probably was the first eye witness to make contact with the police
> after the shooting it's logical that the description that was
> broadcast came from Howard Brennan. That description...White
> male...in his early thirties...about 5' 10" ...slender, weighing about
> 165 pounds.... only superficially fit Oswald. He was a slender white
> male, and that's about all of the description that fit Oswald. There
> were probably hundreds of other "slender white males" in the vicinity
> who actually were in their early thirties, who weighed close to 165
> pounds and were 5 ' 10" tall.
>
> At about the time ( 12:45) that the description of the gunman was
> being broadcast, inspector Sawyer was transmitting a description to
> headquarters that included the information that the the gunman was
> armed with a "30-30 or some type of Winchester". Obviously a 30-30
> is a sporting or hunting rifle and NOT a Mannlicher Carcano, nor could
> it be mistaken for a Carcano, or any other military rifle.
The trigger housing of the Carcano most certainly could have been
mistaken for the similar shaped lever action of a .30-.30 Winchester
Model 94.
> > >http://the-puzzle-palace.com/windshield.htm-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Nonsense...don't make an ass of yerself by posting about a subject of
which you obviously have little knowledge.
Even a person with poor eyesight would not mistake a Mannlicher
Carcano for a 30-30 Winchester.
Walt
> > > >http://the-puzzle-palace.com/windshield.htm-Hidequoted text -
Todd W. Vaughan
Bullshit.
I have both weapons (do you?) and can assure you that at a distance,
under similar conditions (lighting, angle, amount of weapon exposed)
at a quicl glance any lay person could make the mistake.
I see above you're silent on the fact that Brennan also said in his
affadavit that the man he saw was in a window "in the east end of
[sic] the building and the second row of windows from the top" not
the WEST end of the builidng as you claim.
>
> > > > >http://the-puzzle-palace.com/windshield.htm-Hidequotedtext -
Walt
Yes I've got several Carcanos and Win 30-30's.... Why do you try to
pull this petty crap??
If you think anybody would mistake the long metal exposed barrel and
tubular magazine of a winchester 30-30 for the Mannlicher's wooden
stock you are definitely nuttier than a walnut tree.
> I see above you're silent on the fact that Brennan also said in his
> affadavit that the man he saw was in a window "in the east end of
> [sic] the building and the second row of windows from the top" not
> the WEST end of the builidng as you claim.
Stick to one subject per thread.... But I've said many times that
Brennan said that he saw the light clothing clad gunman in the east
end windows BEFORE BEFORE the motorcade arrived.
If you want to debate the point start a new thread.
Todd W. Vaughan
Petty? Having the weapons and being able to do comapisons is crucial
to making a determination.
>
> If you think anybody would mistake the long metal exposed barrel and
> tubular magazine of a winchester 30-30 for the Mannlicher's wooden
> stock you are definitely nuttier than a walnut tree.
A quick glimpse, from a good distance away, looking upwards at the
weapon, seeing only part of it, and under a stressfull situation, you
bet the the Carcano's wooden
FOREGRIP under the barrel could be mistaken for the tubular magazine
of a Winchester 30-30 under it's barrel, just as the trigger housing
of the Carcano most certainly could have been mistaken for the similar
shaped lever action of a .30-.30 Winchester Model 94.
You're as one dimensional as always.
>
> > I see above you're silent on the fact that Brennan also said in his
> > affadavit that the man he saw was in a window "in the east end of
> > [sic] the building and the second row of windows from the top" not
> > the WEST end of the builidng as you claim.
>
> Stick to one subject per thread....
Too complicated for you?
>But I've said many times that
> Brennan said that he saw the light clothing clad gunman in the east
> end windows BEFORE BEFORE the motorcade arrived.
>
> If you want to debate the point start a new thread.
He also said the gunman was in that same window.
"...I would say the President's back was in line with the last windows
I have previously described I heard what I thought was a back fire. It
run [sic] in my mind that it might be someone throwing firecrackers
out the window of the red brick building and I looked up at the
building. I then saw this man I have described in the window and he
was taking aim with a high powered rifle."
Walt
You idiot asshole.... I meant the petty crap of saying in an arrogant
manner, I know what I'm talking about because I own a Carcano and a
30-30 Winchester.... Big deal.... I own many different kinds of
rifles.
I think you try to pull the cheap crap of trying to convince the
ignorant lurker that a Carcano could be mistaken for a 30-30
Winchester, because basically yer dishonest.
Walt
Walt
Thank you for the excerpt from Brennan's affidavit......
I've been aware that there are a couple of ways that this except can
be interpreted for a long time.
I believe in the preceding sentence Brennan gives an estimate of how
far from the intersection of Houston and and Elm the car was. If I
recall he said it was about fifty yards. Fifty yards west of the
intersection would have put the Linclon nearly directly in a direct
line with the west side of the TSBD. Since the TSBD was over a
hundred across the front and it's NE corner was located about twenty
feet from the curb of Houston. The NW corner was approximately 40
yards from the houston street curb. So JFK's back would have been
directly in front of the NW corner of the TSBD.
Walt
David Von Pein
to his loony theory about Brennan. But it appears Walter is going to
stick to his (west-end) gun till they close the box on him.
I've ripped his silly "West-End Shooter" theory to pieces on numerous
occasions. Here are the last two such occasions:
SHATTERING A LOONY THEORY ABOUT HOWARD BRENNAN:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7d3264251021ff76
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/06c1f09dbba91a91
Walt
You hope you've destroyed the evidence that a gunman who was not
Oswald was firing a hunting rifle from the WEST end window.
But the FACTS still stand..... and beckon you to try again.....
The Gunman was about 32 /33 years old.............LHO was just 24
The GM weighed between 165 and 175 pounds....LHO weighed 140 pounds
The GM was wearing a light colored sport shirt.....LHO was wearing a
reddish brown shirt
GM was wearing white trousers....... LHO was
wearing dark gray trousers
Arnold Rowland saw the GM STANDING behind the fully open WEST END
window, with a hunting rifle in his hands.
Brennan DESCRIBED the west end window when he said th GM was STANDING
and aiming rifle from that window, and
he could see all of the gunman from his hips to the top of his head.
Walt
David Von Pein
today as well.
Brennan never once "DESCRIBED" (proverbial all caps) the "west-end"
window. Never.
And here's additional proof that Walt will sweep under his curious CT
rug....proof beyond any doubt that Brennan was referring to only the
EAST-end ("SN") window when the GUNMAN WAS FIRING HIS RIFLE.....
Mr. BELIN. Now, window A, on Exhibit 481, when you saw it, how high do
you believe it was open?
Mr. BRENNAN. I believe that at the time he was firing, it was open
just like this.
Mr. BELIN. Just like the windows on the fifth floor immediately below?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is right.
Here is CE481 to which Belin and Brennan were referring:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0113a.jpg
Note how Brennan confirms with his answer "That is right" that he
(Brennan) was referring to only the east-end (circled!) window in
CE481.
Nobody in their right mind could possibly think that Brennan was
referring to a WEST-end window via the testimony above.
Are you in your right mind, Walter?
Walt
> Walt was a kook yesterday.....and (guess what?) he's still a kook
> today as well.
>
> Brennan never once "DESCRIBED" (proverbial all caps) the "west-end"
> window. Never.
>
> And here's additional proof that Walt will sweep under his curious CT
> rug....proof beyond any doubt that Brennan was referring to only the
> EAST-end ("SN") window when the GUNMAN WAS FIRING HIS RIFLE.....
>
Mr. BELIN. Now, window A, on Exhibit 481, when you saw it, how high
do
you believe it was open?
Mr. BRENNAN. I believe that at the time he was firing, it was open
just like this.
Mr. BELIN. Just like the windows on the fifth floor immediately
below?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is right.
Excellent.....We both KNOW that the EAST end window was NEVER fully
open between 12:25 and 12:35 ( there are numerous photos that show
this to be a FACT.)
BUT Brennan DESCRIBED the gunman who was wearing a light colored
shirt, as STANDING and using the window frame to steady the rifle,
with the barrel of the rifle outside of the window. Since we KNOW
that the EAST window was not far enough open for the gunman to perform
the action that Brennan DESCRIBED, it's obvious that the gunman was
NOT behind that window. And the FACT that Arnold Rowland said he saw
the gunman who was wearing a light colored sport shirt, STANDING
behind the FULLY OPEN window on the WEST end of the sixth floor lends
verification to Brennan's account.
Walt
Here is CE481 to which Belin and Brennan were referring:
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_...
David Von Pein
Walt
> You can't reason with CT-Kooks. Walt is living proof, 24/7.
Translation...... It is impossible to destroy the truth with a lie.
Truth with stand like a beacon in a dark stormy night, though it may
be obscured by clouds, and fog, and rain, from time to time....It
remains standing shining it's light for all to see. There are those
who refuse to believe their eyes and follow the light ( eventually
they will perish) but for those who want to find the truth it is
there.
Walt.... 24:07
David Von Pein
...Even if a kook at a nuthouse has to physically move a heavy TSBD
window from one side of the building to the other side...and has to
totally misrepresent what another human being named Brennan is
saying...the CT truth is there....by God!
Walt
Physically move a window??? What the hell have you been smokin?? I
guess I have to remind you that even an assassin has legs so he could
appear in the east end window at one time, and then leave, and
reappear at the WEST end window, where he was seen STANDING and aiming
the rifle out of the wide open window.
Walt
aeffects
Yes, my son....
btw, young'in - Brennan lied, admitted it, in black and white -- you'd
know that if you read the WCR....not a good sign for defenders of the
WCR, we 'certainly' hope daBugliosi does better.....
the "kook" shit is getting a bit stale, David. We understand the
stress your under, being the only legitimate Nutter here [with he
exception of Todd] defending Nutter philosophy abouts.
David Von Pein
Oh, you mean when he said he COULDN'T positively I.D. Oswald when he
really COULD have done so on Nov. 22nd?
And when he gave a perfectly-reasonable explanation for why he didn't
I.D. LHO right away at a lineup?
Boy! That's really a great "lie" for you CTers to build your case
around, huh?
You'd have a much better case for Brennan "lying" if Howard's 11/22
affidavit had included an obvious non-Oswald type of description in
it. For example, your case for Brennan lying when he said it was
Oswald in the window would be infinitely stronger if Brennan's
affidavit were to have said something like this: "The man I saw firing
a gun was a heavy black man, about 6'2", and weighed around 200-210
pounds". Or ANY type of general description which could have
definitely EXCLUDED Mr. Oswald.
Instead, the 11/22 affidavit signed by Brennan includes a pretty fair
general Oswald-like description ("slender white man"). That certainly
INCLUDES the owner of the rifle up on that same 6th Floor where
Brennan saw this "slender white man" WITH A RIFLE IN HAND.
As I've said many times, but it's worthy of repeating 101 more.....
Given the other physical and circumstantial evidence in the case
(including Oswald's own very guilty-like actions just after the
shooting, including Tippit's murder)....the odds of Howard Brennan
actually having seen someone OTHER THAN LEE HARVEY OSWALD in that
window on Nov. 22 are odds so low as to be virtually ZERO.
aeffects
> >>> Brennan lied..." <<<
>
> Oh, you mean when he said he COULDN'T positively I.D. Oswald when he
> really COULD have done so on Nov. 22nd?
L I E.....
> And when he gave a perfectly-reasonable explanation for why he didn't
> I.D. LHO right away at a lineup?
cover-up for the L I E.... piss poor witness -- was Brennan the guy
that said, "... a good attorney would tear my testimony apart...", or
was that some other LHO done it witness?
> Boy! That's really a great "lie" for you CTers to build your case
> around, huh?
add it to the omissions and to other bending of the truth......
tomnln
HSCA.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1177130066.5...@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> Brennan was a Lying Criminal who needed "IMMUNITY" to appear before the
> HSCA.
Tom..... When are you ever gonna wake up, and learn that witnesses
are HUMAN?
You are your own worst enemy. You profess to be seeking truth and
justice but then you blindfold yourself, and handcuff yourself, by
saying..... " you can't use that persons testimony because he's a
liar". When you use that logic, you have to discard the testimony of
every person the Warren Commission questioned....Because every damned
one of them lied at some time in their life. And by using your
"logic" thay makes them liars.
Howard Brennan was above average when it comes to telling the truth
and being honest. Initally he was just being a good citizen by trying
to help the police apprehend the culprit. He immediately sought out a
cop to tell him that he'd seen a gunman fire a rifle from an upper
story window., and he gave a description of that man.
He knew that Oswald was NOT the man he's seen but as time passed it
became clear to him that the athorities were going to hang the murder
on Oswald regardless what he said. When he went to view the police
line up he told the cops that the man he'd seen firing a rifle from
the window was NOT in that line up. ( Oswald was in the line up)
When he saw Oswald murdered while he was in the custody of the same
people who had tried to get him to put the finger on Oswald in the
line up he smelled something rotten. At that point he knew that if he
continued to be honest and truthful his life and the lives of his
family were in jeopardy.
When he went before the Warren Commission he thought he was beyond the
conspirators and he thought the W.C. was a bonafide investigation,
where he could tell a higher authority the truth about what he'd seen
and experienced. ( Jack Ruby had the same idea) It soon became clear
to Brennan that the W.C. was NOT seeking the truth, and yet he
continued to try to set the record straight despite Belin twisting his
words.
What would you have done if you had been in Howard Brennan's shoes,
Tom??
Walt
>
> "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:1177130066.5...@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > window on Nov. 22 are odds so low as to be virtually ZERO.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
tomnln
Walt.
ps'
watch the name-calling.
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:1177246725.7...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> You sound to me like you're making excuses for someone who needed "Immunity"
> Walt.
>
> ps'
> watch the name-calling.
Name calling.... Where? I'm offering you helpful constructive
criticism and you think it's name calling?
If you don't recognize that you have to sort out the lies of people
like Baker, and Fritz, and Day...you have nailed one foot to the floor
and you're doomed to rotate in circles never getting anywhere.
Walt
>
> "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote in message
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Are you sure Von Pea Brain is "legitimate".... I heard his mother
disavowed giving birth to him.
Walt
Bud
You guys suck at smack-talk.
> Walt
aeffects
that is NOT north of Charles River tin-foil beannie chat....Dudster
> > Walt
David Von Pein
I'd suggest that Walt dig up a copy of the 70-minute CBS-TV
documentary "WHO KILLED JFK? FACTS, NOT FICTION" (1992).
In that program, a portion of a circa 1964 interview with Howard
Brennan is shown. During that clip of Brennan describing what he saw
on 11/22/63, Brennan says that during the shooting itself he "LOOKED
DIRECTLY ACROSS AND UP" (in order to see the gunman fire his last
gunshot).
Again, Brennan said "Directly across and up". He didn't say anything
about looking to his LEFT to see any gunman fire from the WEST side of
the Depository.
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0112a.jpg
Was Brennan lying to CBS-TV, Walt?
Of course, this is just one more example (among many, many others)
that demonstrates Walt to be a Grade-A kook when it comes to this
"Brennan Saw A West-End Killer" thing that he's got stuck up his anal
cavity for some reason.
And, of course, another huge problem Walt has (although he claims it's
not a problem at all) is when David Belin asked this question during
Brennan's WC session:
"Did you see any other people in any other windows that you can
recollect?"
With Belin receiving this answer in return:
"Not on that {sixth} floor."