Touring the Tippit Scene

[Charles Collins]

Nope. His quote says nothing about the AC being installed when the building was constructed either.

Jerry says it and I agree with his statement. Here is some of the text from the article Jerry linked to:

The Texas Theatre was opened at 231 West Jefferson Boulevard with fanfare on San Jacinto Day, April 21, 1931. The Texas Theatre was the novelty of longtime Oak Cliff resident and entrepreneur, C. R. McHenry, better known in the community as “Uncle Mack.” McHenry’s dream was to build a theater with state-of-the-art projection and sound equipment.
McHenry partnered with four Dallas-area businessmen to help him realize this dream: Harold B. Robb, E. H. Rowley, (Robb & Rowley Theatres) W. G. Underwood and David Bernbaum. Together they hired renowned architect W. Scott Dunne to design the Texas. He opted for a “Venetian” style, quite similar to his earlier Texas Theater in San Angelo. The design included opera boxes in the auditorium under a full night sky, fountains, projected clouds on the ceiling, and of course a giant chandelier. The completed theatre was the largest “suburban” movie house and the third-largest theatre in Dallas.
The Texas’ developers spared no expense and boasted that the theater was “fireproof” – constructed entirely of concrete. The theatre was the first in the area built for talking pictures and it featured the second-largest Barton organ in Dallas. However, McHenry was most proud of the cooling and ventilation system which blew 200,000 cubic feet of air per minute through a water-cooled system pumped from a 4,000-gallon tank. The cooling system made “The Texas” the first theater in Dallas with air conditioning. Billionaire film producer and renowned aviator Howard Hughes and his business partner Harold B. Franklin, another Hollywood producer, briefly owned the Robb & Rowley movie theater chain in the early 30′s during construction and opening of the Texas Theatre.

The article clearly indicates that McHenry developed the Texas Theater and opened it in 1931. And that McHenry was most proud of the cooling and ventilation system. This implies that the cooling system was a part of the original construction. Whether you agree or not.

[Charles Collins]

Fair enough. That’s why I asked for a cite.

Except the quote that you did find does not necessarily contradict that.

 

[John Iacoletti]

Do you? I've seen you debating air-conditioning set, Oswald's underwear, the meaning of words and God knows what else, ......but the assassination? Nah.. not so much

It is truly amazing what mental gymnastics and hoops that Charles will jump through to try to justify his conjecture that Oswald was familiar with the layout of the Texas Theater and completely ignore the bigger picture.

It still isn’t “likely” in any valid sense, but let’s assume for the sake of argument that Oswald definitely was familiar with the layout of the Texas Theater.

So what?

[John Iacoletti]

even though this forum isn’t a court of law, hearsay is frowned upon....

You mean like Priscilla Johnson McMillan’s dramatized accounts of the Oswalds’ day to day activities, conversations, and thoughts in a book published in 1977?

[Charles Collins]

You mean like Priscilla Johnson McMillan’s dramatized accounts of the Oswalds’ day to day activities, conversations, and thoughts in a book published in 1977?

That is what I was cryptically referring to. You said it was hearsay; I said that this forum isn’t a court of law.

Also, we are discussing the likelihood of something. Not proving it. You can disagree. But claiming nonsense like nothing is likely or unlikely is the response one of you spouted instead of saying you disagree and here are the reasons why.

[Charles Collins]

It is truly amazing what mental gymnastics and hoops that Charles will jump through to try to justify his conjecture that Oswald was familiar with the layout of the Texas Theater and completely ignore the bigger picture.

It still isn’t “likely” in any valid sense, but let’s assume for the sake of argument that Oswald definitely was familiar with the layout of the Texas Theater.

So what?

Yeah, the “so what question” gets lost in the nonsensical arguments. The reason it was brought up was due to the floor plan layout posted showing the possibility that LHO could have gone up to the balcony to avoid the concession stand ticket taker. And then proceed to the north staircase and go back down to the main level in an effort to blend in with the others there and make it more difficult for anyone to find him (in case he was seen sneaking in). It definitely threw off some of the ones looking for him.

My thoughts are that LHO likely knew ahead of time that he had this circuitous route through the theater available. And that once he got past Postal undetected he had a very good chance of getting into the theater without having to produce a ticket to a ticket taker.

You can disagree with this. But it also provides a possible explanation for those who wonder why LHO would take a chance of sneaking in (and drawing unwanted attention to himself) instead of purchasing a ticket.

[Jerry Freeman]

  Elcan Elliott? Gus Russo interviewed him for his book "Live by the Sword." ...  acting suspiciously (he saw the man "relieving himself" near a bush) - that he later identified as Oswald before the shooting of Tippit near North Beckley.
A fuller account is here:  https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2759.msg101861.html#msg101861

Where---[The suspect was walking back and forth along 10th a few times]
So that would give the accused 10 minutes to walk from the rooming house...go whizz behind the bushes walk up and down the block...have a confrontation with a cop...and then shoot the cop.
I learned nothing else from that tour that wasn't in Readers Digest years ago.
And yeah...the gospel according to St. Priscilla targeted curious housewives itching to read a soap about the Oswald's. So it had to be juicy...no matter how off the wall it sounded.

[Martin Weidmann]

That is what I was cryptically referring to. You said it was hearsay; I said that this forum isn’t a court of law.

Also, we are discussing the likelihood of something. Not proving it. You can disagree. But claiming nonsense like nothing is likely or unlikely is the response one of you spouted instead of saying you disagree and here are the reasons why.

Also, we are discussing the likelihood of something. Not proving it.

Says the same guy who previously said;

When I say something is likely, it implies that I could be wrong about whatever it is that I believe is likely. But the chances that I am wrong are low compared to the chances that I am correct; that is what likely means.

No, it means it is probable that I am correct, not definitely correct.

You're not arguing that "likely" means "possible", you're agruing that "likely" means you're probably correct which implicitely means you're arguing to "prove it". You're just doing so with a safeguard build in and in the full knowledge that you will never admit to being wrong.

Too bad for you that it's very likely that you're wrong about this one.

Play the music and let's go round again.....