Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post



    I quote from Earlene Roberts' affidavit to the Warren Commission:

    Oswald went to his room and was only there a very few minutes before coming out. I noticed he had a jacket he was putting on. I recall the jacket was a dark color and it was the type that zips up the front. He was zipping the jacket up as he left.


    And that evidence, I suggest, destroys the case against Oswald, which is based on his having worn a light grey jacket.
    No it doesn’t. That’s just your poor thinking. All it shows is that Earlene Roberts made an error.

    Marina Oswald identified the jacket. That on its own is game, set and match on that point.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
      I have provided proof that there was a rail track just behind the fence.
      I've looked at the pics, and while I do see some distinctive track going from the dirt area at the edge of the parking lot, it doesn't look exactly like the definite rail tracks seen at the edge of the lot. I don't see crossties.

      Yet, it goes from the dirt edge into the middle of the parking lot, ending abruptly. It does line up with the white structure (a sort of pergola?) with the breezeway cutouts. I think it could be a spur track or shunt for train cars. But as it doesn't continue forward, anything on it would need to be backed up. There is also a tree very close to this track-like marking.

      However, it is also possible that the train was on the more clearly defined tracks just caught at the edge of the photo. These parallel the lot, and also could line up with the pergola, and seem to continue so trains could go forward. So the picture still works to support your theory.
      Pat D. https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...rt/reading.gif
      ---------------
      Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
      ---------------

      Comment


      • So behind the picket fence we have Carl Desroe looking toward the president who saw nothing……no one shooting and more importantly no one escaping.

        We have Eugene Boone who checked the loose soil and saw no prints.

        And we have Lee Bowers looking from the tower to the Knoll who saw no one escaping.

        Perhaps our conspiracy theorists enlighten us as to how a man carrying a rifle (who definitely didn’t escape going forward over the fence) managed to escape totally unseen?

        I can…….there was never a gunman there. It has been absolutely disproven as a conspiracist fantasy. So they can go on all they like about Groden’s Rorschach ink blot Badgeman or Black Dog man and any other of the proven phantoms because there was no one behind the fence. This should have been evident to all but the most gullible who actually believed that plotters would have been such colossal morons as to put a gunman where anyone could have seen, photographed or filmed him, and where he couldn’t have escaped unseen. Not to mention the fact that it was I from of a carpark used by the Dallas police, courthouse staff and the District Attorneys.

        Not a single response as predicted because these fantasists have no answer to give. It has been proven by evidence that there was no gunman on the Grassy Knoll…….but sensible people have all known this for 60 years.

        Comment


        • UPDATE

          According to Shomes:

          Curry was an idiot because he recognised that there was no proof of Oswald's guilt.

          Dr Humes was allegedly incapable of estimating an angle to within 40 degrees' accuracy, in spite of being a pathologist.

          FBI agents Sibert's and O'Neill's autopsy diagrams are dismissed on the ground that they were not pathologists, even though they agree with the pathologist's autopsy diagrams!

          The testimony of eight witnesses, including three Secret Service agents, that there was a double shot, is dismissed as meaningless.

          The three witnesses in Mexico City who said that the man claiming to be Oswald had blond hair are mistaken and I am told to grow up.

          All the television and radio reports and policemen's affidavits, making clear that the rifle found was a Mauser, are wrong or mistaken.

          Earlene Roberts made an error when she swore that Oswald put on a dark jacket, even though she was the only witness who actually saw him put a jacket on and the only witness who knew him personally.​

          Comment


          • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


            I don't understand your response, except that I sense it must be sarcastic.

            Would you please answer my point directly?

            I made the point that seven - a majority - of the witnesses cited by the police to the shooting, or aftermath of the shooting, of Tippit gave descriptions of the murderer which cannot be descriptions of Oswald.

            That is, I suggest, a damning fact.

            Do you dispute it?
            It would be a damning if it were a fact. It isn't. Witness descriptions varied, but none of them could not have been Oswald.

            Mr. BALL. Mrs. Markham, do you know a man named Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No; I do not.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever hear of the name?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Did not.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a New York lawyer who says he was from New York?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a lawyer who was investigating the case in behalf of the deceased man, Lee Oswald?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a man who said he was representing the mother of Lee Oswald?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. You don't remember ever talking to a man named Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. In an appearance before this Commission, a man named Mark Lane has testified this way. Let me read it to you. That was on Wednesday, March 4, 1964, Vol. II of a public hearing before this Commission, page 51. This is what he said:
            "I spoke with the deponent"-he is talking about an affidavit that you made to the Dallas Police Department-"l spoke with the deponent, the eyewitness, Helen Louise Markham, and Mrs. Markham told me Miss or Mrs., I didn't ask her if she was married--told me she was 100 feet away from the police car, not the 50 feet which appears in the affidavit."
            Do you recall ever stating that to Mr. Lane or anyone else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; no, sir.
            Mr. BALL. He testified: "She gave me a more detailed description of the man who she said shot Officer Tippit. She said he was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy." Did you say that to Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; I don't even know the man.
            Mr. BALL. Or anybody else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever tell anyone that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Was the man, is it your memory now that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir. He wasn't too heavy.
            Mr. BALL. Is it your memory that his hair was bushy?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. It wasn't so bushy. It was, say, windblown or something.
            What I mean, he didn't have a lot of hair.
            Mr. BALL. He didn't have a lot of hair?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; that I could see. I don't even know that man; I never talked to nobody.
            Representative FORD. You didn't talk to him by telephone or any other means?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Representative FORD. Did you ever get an anonymous phone call from a person who asked you these questions?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
            Mr. BALL. Now, he also says, and he testified as follows:
            "Helen Markham said to me she was taken to the police station on that same day, that she was very upset. She, of course, had never seen anyone killed in front of her eyes before, and in the police station she identified Oswald as the person who had shot Officer Tippit in the lineup, including three other persons. She said no one pointed Oswald out to her, and she said she was just shown four people, and she picked Oswald. She said when he asked her how she could identify him, she said she was able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket and dark trousers."
            Did you ever make that statement to him?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. I did not, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Or to anyone else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Not to anybody.
            Mr. BALL. When you identified Oswald--it was the number 2 man--were you told the number 2 man whom you identified in the lineup?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, I was not.
            Mr. BALL. Were you ever told his name?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
            Mr. BALL. Ever told his name later?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Nobody, nobody told me nothing.
            Mr. BALL. Well, the man that you identified as the number 2 man in the lineup in the police station, you identified him as the man you had seen shoot Officer Tippit?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, I did.
            Mr. BALL. Did you identify him because of his clothing that he had on at that time in the lineup.
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Just like I told you. I mostly looked at his face, his eyes, and his clothing, too.
            Mr. BALL. He said here you were able to identify him, Mark Lane testified that you told him you were able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket. First, did the man in the lineup have a gray jacket on?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.​

            Helen Markham picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Domingo Benavides told police wasn't sure if he could ID Tippet's killer.
            Johnny C. Brewer​ identified Oswald at the theater.
            Ted Callaway picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Barbara J. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Virginia R. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Sam Guinyard picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Warren Reynolds identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph. (Oswald was dead by the time police contacted him.)
            William W. Scoggins picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            William Arthur Smith​ identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph.




            "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

            "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

            Comment


            • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
              UPDATE

              According to Shomes:

              Curry was an idiot because he recognised that there was no proof of Oswald's guilt.

              Dr Humes was allegedly incapable of estimating an angle to within 40 degrees' accuracy, in spite of being a pathologist.

              FBI agents Sibert's and O'Neill's autopsy diagrams are dismissed on the ground that they were not pathologists, even though they agree with the pathologist's autopsy diagrams!

              The testimony of eight witnesses, including three Secret Service agents, that there was a double shot, is dismissed as meaningless.

              The three witnesses in Mexico City who said that the man claiming to be Oswald had blond hair are mistaken and I am told to grow up.

              All the television and radio reports and policemen's affidavits, making clear that the rifle found was a Mauser, are wrong or mistaken.

              Earlene Roberts made an error when she swore that Oswald put on a dark jacket, even though she was the only witness who actually saw him put a jacket on and the only witness who knew him personally.​

              No answers to any of the points made.

              Pathetic and sad.



              Comment


              • Please see my replies below.



                Originally posted by Fiver View Post

                Witness descriptions varied, but none of them could not have been Oswald.


                Helen Markham picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                Helen Markham could not recognise her own voice on a recording of a conversation she had with Mark Lane.

                On the recording, she said that the killer was short with slightly bushy hair.

                Oswald was not short and had straight, thinning hair.




                Domingo Benavides told police wasn't sure if he could ID Tippet's killer.

                Domingo Benavides said the assassin had curly hair, which needed cutting, and a ruddy complexion. Oswald had neither curly hair nor a ruddy complexion and anyone looking at photos of him taken at that time can see that he did not need a haircut.



                Johnny C. Brewer​ identified Oswald at the theater.

                Johnny Brewer did not see Oswald take his seat in the theater.

                He could not therefore know how long Oswald had been in the theater.




                Ted Callaway picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                Calloway made a prejudiced statement about the way Oswald was dressed when he identified him: 'He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket.'



                Barbara J. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                She said the killer wore a dark coat, not a light grey zipper jacket.



                Virginia R. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                Virginia Davis said that the murderer 'didn't look like he was over 20.'



                Sam Guinyard picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                Guinyard testified that the killer wore a brown shirt.

                Oswald's shirt was grey.




                Warren Reynolds identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph. (Oswald was dead by the time police contacted him.)

                According to Dallas Police Patrolman Roy W. Walker, Warren Reynolds described the suspect as having wavy hair and wearing a white jacket.



                William W. Scoggins picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.

                William Scoggins testified that the assassin was wearing a darkish-brown jacket, not a light grey zipper jacket.



                William Arthur Smith​ identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph.

                Smith testified that the killer wore a sport coat.

                Sports jackets do not have zips.



                Comment


                • Originally posted by Pcdunn View Post

                  I've looked at the pics, and while I do see some distinctive track going from the dirt area at the edge of the parking lot, it doesn't look exactly like the definite rail tracks seen at the edge of the lot. I don't see crossties.

                  Yet, it goes from the dirt edge into the middle of the parking lot, ending abruptly. It does line up with the white structure (a sort of pergola?) with the breezeway cutouts. I think it could be a spur track or shunt for train cars. But as it doesn't continue forward, anything on it would need to be backed up. There is also a tree very close to this track-like marking.

                  However, it is also possible that the train was on the more clearly defined tracks just caught at the edge of the photo. These parallel the lot, and also could line up with the pergola, and seem to continue so trains could go forward. So the picture still works to support your theory.
                  Thanks Pat. I can’t see anything to disprove that Carl Desroe was behind the fence and saw nothing. We can add Bowers to that. I don’t really see why any more is required.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
                    Please see my replies below.



                    Lane can’t be trusted. He clearly badgered the witness.

                    The rest of the post is equally nonsense.

                    Comment


                    • This is scraping the barrel even by conspiracy theorist standards. Kennedy was killed by William Greer and Jackie Kennedy.



                      When anyone has 5 minutes to spare have a look online through the list of JFK conspiracy books. You’ll have to keep picking your jaw up off the floor. These suckers with believe absolutely anything.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post




                        Here are fifteen:




                        and it was like a double bang — bang, bang... This was instantaneous.

                        (KELLERMAN TESTIMONY)


                        The last two seemed to be just simultaneously, one behind the other

                        (GREER TESTIMONY)


                        I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them.

                        (HICKEY TESTIMONY)



                        ... there was a bang [and then a few seconds later] and then there was bang! bang! - very close together.

                        (ROBERT MACNEIL, CANADIAN JOURNALIST)



                        I heard three shots. One, then a slight pause, then two very close together.

                        (LEE BOWERS TESTIMONY)



                        ... one shot, then a pause, and then two shots in very close order ... almost on top of each other.


                        (LEE BOWERS INTERVIEW)



                        ... the second two [shots] seemed to be simultaneously.


                        (SEYMOUR WEITZMAN)



                        The second two shots were immediate. It was almost as if one were an echo of the other. They came so quickly, the sound of one did not cease until the second shot.

                        (MARY WOODWARD, DALLAS MORNING NEWS)



                        I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time and then there were two real fast bullets together.

                        (LINDA WILLIS, ONE OF THE EYEWITNESSES CLOSEST TO THE ASSASSINATION)



                        They were in rather rapid succession.

                        (DALLAS MAYOR EARLE CABELL)



                        Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession.

                        (LADY BIRD JOHNSON)



                        the first shot was fired, followed in quick succession by two more

                        (WILLIAM MCINTYRE TESTIMONY)



                        In other words, it was the first, and then a pause, and then the other two were real close.

                        (CLYDE HAYGOOD TESTIMONY)



                        and then the third shot was fired right behind the second one


                        (JAMES JARMAN TESTIMONY)



                        there was a slight pause after the first shot and then the next two was right close together

                        (BILLY LOVELADY AFFIDAVIT)



                        I heard one shot and then a pause and then this repetition-two shots right behind the other

                        (EDWARD SHIELDS TESTIMONY)
                        These people were all present on the day of the assassination mind you ,were all idiots and morons, ,lied or were mistaken according to some people here who weren't even born at the time.

                        Who consistently advocate the silly lone gunman theory provided by the warren commission, a theory based on fake autopsy reports, fake film footage and slide pics etc,etc that was and has been debunked over many decades .

                        Some suckers still believe it tho .

                        Exactly what the WC intended . "The Sucker report"
                        'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
                          I have read the comments posted today.


                          A witness by the name of Burroughs, who said he sold popcorn to Oswald at about the time that Tippit is known to have been shot, was not - pointed out one of my adversaries - assistant manager in the movie theater but in a much lower position and obviously not qualified to remember whom he was selling popcorn to or when.

                          I’d forgotten this bit of silliness. A perfect example of conspiracist cherrypicking.

                          At the WC Burroughs had been asked specifically if he’d seen Oswald and he said that he hadn’t and that Oswald must have sneaked in (which he did of course.)

                          PI has obviously been watching The Men Who Killed Kennedy which in the JFK league as a work of fiction. Burrough’s gets his time from the time that the movie began but we know that he was wrong because Johnnie Brewer saw Oswald at his store and followed him to the theatre and this was after he’d heard about Tippit’s murder on the radio. Police cars were still passing with sirens on. Janet Postal also saw Oswald enter the theatre and she had already heard of Tippit’s murder on her radio and also testified about the police cars. She even mentioned that her boss went out and got into his car to follow them to the murder site. So we KNOW with 100% certainty was time Oswald arrived at the Texas Theatre and it was after Tippit had been murdered (by Oswald)

                          When did Burrough’s suddenly mention that he’d sold popcorn to Oswald? After he’d spoken to conspiracy theorist Jim Marrs.

                          No matter how conclusive the evidence, conspiracy theorists will still try and manipulate it in favour of their fantasies.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                            These people were all present on the day of the assassination mind you ,were all idiots and morons, ,lied or were mistaken according to some people here who weren't even born at the time.

                            Who consistently advocate the silly lone gunman theory provided by the warren commission, a theory based on fake autopsy reports, fake film footage and slide pics etc,etc that was and has been debunked over many decades .

                            Some suckers still believe it tho .

                            Exactly what the WC intended . "The Sucker report"
                            Thank you for that insightful, well thought out comment. Your brilliantly reasoned analysis is an example to us all.

                            Comment


                            • And ear-witnesses are so reliable of course aren’t they?

                              Like AJ Millican:

                              Just after the presidents car passed, I heard three shots come from up toward Houston and Elm right by the Book Depository Building, and then immediately I heard two more shots come from the arcade between the Book Store and the Underpass, and then three more shots came from the same direction only sounded further back.”

                              Or eye-witnesses:

                              Like Marvin Faye Chism:

                              ”…the presidents wife immediately stood over him, and she pulled him up, and lay him down on the seat, and she stood up over him in the car. The President was standing and waving and smiling at the people when the shot happened…….The two men in the front of the car stood up, and then when the second shot was fired, they all fell down and the car took off just like that.”

                              Both of these were actually there and are actual witnesses. When will you conspiracy theorist get it into your heads about how potentially unreliable witnesses can be especially in traumatic circumstances? They have to be assessed first but you lot just parade them out without giving them the slightest thought.

                              And what about these 5 witnesses?

                              James Simmons
                              Nolan Potter.
                              Sam Holland.
                              Curtis Freeman Bishop.
                              Lee Bowers.

                              All 5 of these said that immediately after the shots a police motorcyclist jumped the kerb and rode at least part way up the Knoll. We know for an absolute fact that this didn’t happen. One officer parked his motorcycle at the kerb and ran up the Knoll but he’s been identified as Clyde Haywood.

                              Try assessing your witnesses properly before trotting them out….especially the numerous conspiracy witnesses who mysteriously start ‘remembering’ that they’d seen stuff years later (usually after talking to people like Jim Marrs and Mark Lane)

                              Comment


                              • Here is an extract from Julia Postal's testimony:


                                So, well, I called the police, and he wanted to know why I thought it was their man, and I said, “Well, I didn’t know,” and he said, “Well, it fits the description,” and I have not - I said I hadn’t heard the description. All I know is, “This man is running from them for some reason.” And he wanted to know why, and told him because every time the sirens go by he would duck and he wanted to know-well, if he fits the description is what he says. I said,

                                “Let me tell you what he looks like and you take it from there.” And explained that he had on this brown sports shirt and I couldn’t tell you what design it was, and medium height, ruddy looking to me, and he said, “Thank you,”​...



                                Here is an extract from Domingo Benavides' testimony:


                                Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what kind of shirt he had on?

                                Mr. BENAVIDES. It was dark in color, but I don’t remember exactly what
                                color....


                                Mr. BELIN. What about his skin? Was he fair complexioned or dark complexioned?

                                Mr. BENAVIDES. He wasn’t dark.

                                Mr. BELIN. Average complexion?

                                Mr. BENAVIDES. So ; a little bit darker than average.

                                Mr. BELIN. My complexion?

                                Mr. BENAVIDES. I wouldn’t say that any more. I would say he is about your complexion, sir. Of course he looked, his skin looked a little bit ruddier than mine.

                                Mr. BELIN. His skin looked ruddier than mine?...


                                Mr. BENAVIDES. I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of-looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off. and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn’t taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in back.



                                Both Postal and Benavides described a man who was wearing a dark-coloured shirt and had a ruddy complexion.

                                Oswald did not have a ruddy complexion.
                                Last edited by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1; 03-18-2023, 11:23 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X