Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket

[Bill Brown]

How do you positively identify someone you don't recognize?

On the evening of the murder, many months before her confused Warren Commission testimony, did Markham pick the "number two" man or not?  Of course she did.

[John Mytton]

Transfer of fiber while handling evidence.

So the fibers jumped into the sleeves of Oswald's jacket and the same fibers lodged themselves in Oswald's rifle?



JohnM

[Bill Brown]

So now it's "pick". I get it.

Correct.  Markham picked out the #2 man (Oswald) as the man she saw murder a police officer.

[Bill Brown]

Transfer of fiber while handling evidence.

I know what cross contamination means.  Sheesh.

I'm asking you to explain how it's relevant to the fibers found in the sleeve of the jacket.

[Bill Brown]

If you knew you wouldn't have to ask how it's relevant.

The question is: when were the fibers transferred?

Can you answer that question?

Finally.  An explanation (or, at least a question).

Of course I cannot say when the fibers were transferred.  No one can possibly answer such an inane question.  If the fibers found inside the sleeve of the jacket did come from Oswald's shirt, what difference would it make it they were transferred there on 11/22/63 or a month earlier?

[Bill Brown]

The question is how the lineup was conducted since she testified to not recognizing the man.

What she testified to was that the number two man is the man who she saw shoot the policeman.

[Martin Weidmann]

So you didn't understand cross contamination.

If the transfer of fibers happened while the DPD was handling the evidence they are irrelevant to the case.

What ever case you're trying to make.

There is no solid chain of custody for the white jacket found at the carpark. The initials on the jacket were place there at the police station (just like it happened with the revolver) and (if Westbrook's testimony is to be believed) clearly do not correspond with the officers who actually found that jacket and took it to the station.

Except for Earlene Roberts saying so (and she was half blind and paying more attention to the TV) there is no evidence that Oswald left the rooming house wearing a jacket at all and even Roberts rejected CE 162 because the jacket she claimed to have seen was darker.

That same afternoon, DPD officers took all Oswald's belongings from the rooming house and took them to the station. If the gray jacket (CE 162) was even in Oak Cliff (and not in Irving) this is how the gray jacket could have gotten to the police station.

The same goes for the search without a warrant at Ruth Paine's house. If the gray jacket was actually there, DPD officers could have brought in to the station from there.

[Martin Weidmann]

During his WC testimony, Barnes was asked a lot of questions about what he did at the Tippit scene of the shooting and later at the crime lab, but they hardly asked him anything about the jacket.

He said he took a photo of the car under which the jacket was found, but there is not a word in his testimony about the jacket itself. They didn't ask him if he knew who found it, or if he had seen or handled it himself. They were not even interested enough to ask him how his initials ended up on the jacket.

For George Doughty, who also initialed the jacket, it's even worse. They did not even call him to testify.

Who really found the jacket, who called it in describing it as being white, who had it when Barnes arrived on the scene to take his picture and how and when it got to the police station is completely and totally unclear.

Some chain of custody!