The "Domino Room Alibi"

[Colin Crow]

You, or him?

(LOL)

Regardless, why do you always take things so personally, Brian I mean Colin?

--  MWT 

I think you got my point about Oswald the bald faced liar (according to Lance).

Do you always post claims about others and then fail to address them when repeatedly requested to do so?

Like the one below.....

"You seem to prefer the interpretations which you believe exonerate Oswald ..."

To be honest, until now I have not paid your contributions to the debate much attention.

[Thomas Graves]

I think you got my point about Oswald the bald faced liar (according to Lance).

Do you always post claims about others and then fail to address them when repeatedly requested to do so?

Like the one below.....

"You seem to prefer the interpretations which you believe exonerate Oswald ..."

To be honest, until now I have not paid your contributions to the debate much attention.

Repeatedly?

It would appear that hyperbole is your self-perceived "forte".

[Colin Crow]

Repeatedly?

It would appear that hyperbole is your self-perceived "forte".

I count 3 successive posts by me on this page....

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2187.120.html

Perhaps you could suggest a more appropriate alternative descriptor...

[Thomas Graves]

I count 3 successive posts by me on this page....

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2187.120.html

Perhaps you could suggest a more appropriate alternative descriptor...

How many different questions are there therein that haven't already haven't attempted to answer?

[Thomas Graves]

It doesn’t. I never claimed it did. Lance postulated in an unsupported claim was that it was somehow behind Oswald's mention of Jarman and Norman under interrogation.

Care to explain why you thought to post this?

You seem to prefer the interpretations which you believe exonerate Oswald ...

I prefer interpretations that are supported by corroborated documented evidence. I have supplied such. Didn't see any by Lance. I am sure he appreciates you championing his cause, even if seemingly abandoned by David.

PS How could I claim full credit Tommy? Would you?

Well, Oh Great Communicator, if you want me to speak for Lance, I would have to say that (going from memory here) Oswald was either in the Domino Room until about 12:26, or he wasn't in the Domino Room at all around lunch time, and took a calculated risk in uttering to the authorities, afterwards, that he'd seen "Junior" and another Negro pass through a section of the first floor during lunchtime.

Will that suffice?

--  MWT 

[Colin Crow]

How many different questions are there therein that haven't already haven't attempted to answer?

Inability to address again noted. I guess I could have used successive instead.....

[Colin Crow]

Well, Oh Great Communicator, if you want me to speak for Lance, I would have to say that (going from memory here) Oswald was either in the Domino Room until about 12:26, or he wasn't in the Domino Room at all around lunch time, and took a calculated risk in uttering to the authorities, afterwards, that he'd seen "Junior" and another Negro pass through a section of the first floor during lunchtime.

Will that suffice?

--  MWT 

I don’t want you to speak on Lance's behalf, you chose to join in to defend his legal reputation. Then his unsupported use of the word "seldom" to promote the rather puerile notion that by mentioning Jarman and Norman having lunch with him, would provide some form of alibi for Oswald.
 
Perhaps you could theorise why Bookout wrote that Oswald claimed they walked through the lunch room.

[Thomas Graves]

Inability to address again noted. I guess I could have used successive instead.....

Yes, proper syntax, grammar and vocabulary are essential, especially when trying to talk one's way out of a DUI, which I did four times, iirc, while I was still imbibing.

Care to rephrase the question (or was there more than one)?

--  MWT