The Bus Stop Farce

[Bill Chapman]

It depends on where Earlene was situated vis-a-vis Oswald of course.

The television was in the right corner (looking towards the street) of the living room. The front door was three windows down to the left. Oswald left his room, crossed the living room and walked towards the front door. Roberts was looking at the TV and thus had her back turned to the living room.

Oswald probably only caught her eye just as he got level with her and opened the front door.

But I maintain that she might have somehow inadvertently merged her memory of the shirt colour in with her description of the jacket, given her lack of attention (she was concentrated on the TV) and compromised eyesight.

And just as inadvertently she might have mistaken a dark shirt for a jacket, just as Baker did in the lunchroom.

Yes, the brown shirt can be mistaken as a jacket
And Earlene testified that she 'looked up' as he came in

[Charles Collins]

It depends on where Earlene was situated vis-a-vis Oswald of course.

The television was in the right corner (looking towards the street) of the living room. The front door was three windows down to the left. Oswald left his room, crossed the living room and walked towards the front door. Roberts was looking at the TV and thus had her back turned to the living room.

Oswald probably only caught her eye just as he got level with her and opened the front door.

But I maintain that she might have somehow inadvertently merged her memory of the shirt colour in with her description of the jacket, given her lack of attention (she was concentrated on the TV) and compromised eyesight.

And just as inadvertently she might have mistaken a dark shirt for a jacket, just as Baker did in the lunchroom.

Where was the oval couch situated in the living room in relation to the TV and the door? I seem to remember a report that she was sitting on the couch.

[Bill Chapman]

These images might just shed some light (groan) on the situation

[Martin Weidmann]

Here is a view from the back of the living room towards the front windows;

in the video above they have the television set placed in front of the middle window, but when Earlene Roberts was there it was more to the right, as you can see in the video below

[Charles Collins]

Here is a view from the back of the living room towards the front windows;

in the video above they have the television set placed in front of the middle window, but when Earlene Roberts was there it was more to the right, as you can see in the video below

The silhouette effect (on the tourists) is very noticeable in the first video. If Roberts was on the couch when he left it could have been a factor, as I suggested. Thanks.

[Martin Weidmann]

The silhouette effect (on the tourists) is very noticeable in the first video. If Roberts was on the couch when he left it could have been a factor, as I suggested. Thanks.

Words like "if" and "could" do not enhance the quality and/or persuasiveness of the evidence being presented.

But as we are speculating, if Roberts was sitting on the couch she would have seen Oswald's backside as he walked towards the front door. The light coming into the living room would only make it more difficult for her to see if he was wearing a dark shirt or a jacket. Just have a look at the girl coming into the room in the first video at about 0.19 sec. How would she have looked to somebody with poor eye sight?

[Charles Collins]

Words like "if" and "could" do not enhance the quality and/or persuasiveness of the evidence being presented.

But as we are speculating, if Roberts was sitting on the couch she would have seen Oswald's backside as he walked towards the front door. The light coming into the living room would only make it more difficult for her to see if he was wearing a dark shirt or a jacket. Just have a look at the girl coming into the room in the first video at about 0.19 sec. How would she have looked to somebody with poor eye sight?

The evidence I am pointing out is the silhouettes shown in the video. It doesn’t need any enhancing or require any additional persuasiveness. It is there for all to see with their own eyes.

The naysayers have already poo poo’d the statements I presented earlier by Hugh Aynesworth regarding Roberts sitting watching TV. So there was no need to repeat that when replying to your post.

We can all see the girl coming through the front door. And tell basically what she is wearing. Regardless of the fact that it is a poor quality video. It would be difficult to say what Roberts was able to see or not see, based only on that video and what we do believe happened. What is apparent to me is that the silhouette effect could have been a factor. And whether (in your opinion) that adds substance to the discussion or not, I couldn’t care less.

[Martin Weidmann]

The evidence I am pointing out is the silhouettes shown in the video. It doesn’t need any enhancing or require any additional persuasiveness. It is there for all to see with their own eyes.

The naysayers have already poo poo’d the statements I presented earlier by Hugh Aynesworth regarding Roberts sitting watching TV. So there was no need to repeat that when replying to your post.

We can all see the girl coming through the front door. And tell basically what she is wearing. Regardless of the fact that it is a poor quality video. It would be difficult to say what Roberts was able to see or not see, based only on that video and what we do believe happened. What is apparent to me is that the silhouette effect could have been a factor. And whether (in your opinion) that adds substance to the discussion or not, I couldn’t care less.

The evidence I am pointing out is the silhouettes shown in the video. It doesn’t need any enhancing or require any additional persuasiveness. It is there for all to see with their own eyes.

Indeed, that's why I posted the video

The naysayers have already poo poo’d the statements I presented earlier by Hugh Aynesworth regarding Roberts sitting watching TV. So there was no need to repeat that when replying to your post.

Two comments; First of all I was not part of the conversation your refer to and secondly there is indeed no need to repeat it because we have Roberts on video showing us what she did and where she was.

We can all see the girl coming through the front door. And tell basically what she is wearing. Regardless of the fact that it is a poor quality video. It would be difficult to say what Roberts was able to see or not see, based only on that video and what we do believe happened. What is apparent to me is that the silhouette effect could have been a factor. And whether (in your opinion) that adds substance to the discussion or not, I couldn’t care less.

I must have struck a nerve. All this bla bla bla means there is more than reasonable doubt about what Roberts saw or not and that's a very weak position to argue that Oswald left the rooming house wearing a jacket.