Ignoring Evidence in Favor of Oswald

[John Mytton]

we're back to what it's about: Cherry picking witnesses.

WOW, that's exactly what you're doing, you've cherry picked Guinyard as your sole explanation that Oswald wasn't there or something, but you fail to acknowledge all the other eyewitnesses who identified Oswald or an armed gunman moving in the same direction.

Mr. BENAVIDES - ...and then he turned to the left there and went on down Patton Street.

Mr. BALL. He was walking towards what street?
Mrs. V DAVIS. He was going down Patton.

Mr. BELIN. Away from Patton or towards Patton?
Mrs. B DAVIS. Towards Patton.

Mr. BALL. Toward Patton?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir; towards Patton.

Mr. SCOGGINS. .... and I looked up and seen him going south on Patton and then when I jumped back in my cab I called my dispatcher.

Mr. REYNOLDS OK; our office is up high where I can have a pretty good view of what was going on. I heard the shots and, when I heard the shots, I went out on this front porch which is, like I say, high, and I saw this man coming down the street with the gun in his hand, swinging it just like he was running. He turned the corner of Patton and Jefferson, going west, and put the gun in his pants and took off, walking.

HAROLD RUSSELL "observed a young white man running south on Patton Avenue carrying a pistol or revolver"

B. M. PATTERSON "advised that at approximately 1:30 PM,...  a white male approximately 30 years of age, running south on Patton Avenue, carrying what appeared to be a revolver in his hand"

L. J. LEWIS... "he observed a white male, approximately thirty years of age, running south on Patton Avenue, carrying either an automatic pistol or a revolver in his hands"



JohnM

[Bill Chapman]

Get over yourself: where did I indicate I had a file on you in particular? On the contrary, I don't have even one folder with your name on it.
That seriously hurt, but I'll get over it in a couple of days.

Bottom line is that I outed you on your "race card" denial.
No doubt you're far out somewhere with your race obsession.

Period.
I'm not too concerned, likely a handful of edits in the pipeline, I'll check back.

I edit on the fly. Period. Not my bad if you lot just can't seem to wait for my attention.

I had no idea that Guinyard was a man of colour until you brought it up via your 'race card' slur. Thanks for the heads up.

[Bill Chapman]

Your argument is moot, but comes as no surprise.

If witnesses were a problem the ones watching the actual shooting could have been eliminated but they weren't.

Neither was Guinyard passed at 10 feet, you FAIL again.

Pretty sure Oswald would be more concerned about encountering more cops, dumb or otherwise. What could Markham do to stop him? Hit him with her purse? Maybe scream him to death?

You're the one who claimed Guinyard @10 feet
I'm the one sticking with Callaway @55 feet
Want to see my record of that? See below.

[Bill Chapman]

Get over yourself: where did I indicate I had a file on you in particular? On the contrary, I don't have even one folder with your name on it.
That seriously hurt, but I'll get over it in a couple of days.

Bottom line is that I outed you on your "race card" denial.
No doubt you're far out somewhere with your race obsession.

Period.
I'm not too concerned, likely a handful of edits in the pipeline, I'll check back.

While you're busy 'checking back' I'll provide further evidence of your OTS** hereabouts.

Re your "Neither was Guinyard passed at 10 feet, you FAIL again":
>>> Seems YOU are the one enlisted in the FAIL#ARMY, hotshot.

To wit:



**Obvious-Troll Status

[Bill Chapman]

Since I've checked back, let's see what Chapman will come up with 'on the fly' to get rid of this statement from Guinyard:

Mr. BALL. What did you do?
Mr. GUINYARD. Helped put him in the ambulance.
Mr. BALL. You stayed there until the ambulance came?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Were you there when the truck came up that was driven by Benavides?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. He came up right after this?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; he came up from the east side---going west.

Distraction, as in: What's that got to do with my point.. y'know.. the 10ft-55ft-Guinyard-Callaway-Oswald thing.

[Bill Chapman]

Another half-cocked argument from Chapman, no surprises as this was the original claim:

On your face, again, LOL.

He even deliberately dropped (allegedly) evidence (shells) to be traced to his gun, ROFL.

He testified to 10 feet under oath, no different from Callaway.

Based on nothing but school merits to get rid of Guinyard.

Trust me, nobody gives a spombleprofglidnoctobuns about your little trophy file.

'Trust me'
> You wish

'Based on nothing but school merits to get rid of Guinyard'.
> LOL! Guinyard ID'd Oswald, fool. No way would I 'get rid' of him

'He testified to 10 feet under oath, no different from Callaway'
> Except that Callaway said 55 feet

'He even deliberately dropped (allegedly) evidence (shells) to be traced to his gun, ROFL'
> The Davis sisters also testified under oath, Rolfie.

'On your face, again, LOL.'
> In your face again, hahaha

[Bill Chapman]

I edit on the fly. Period.
How is that even supposed to make any sense, LOL.

You post your nonsense and THEN try to fix it, otherwise the edits weren't time stamped.

Not my bad if you lot just can't seem to wait for my attention.
Who told you that?

I had no idea that Guinyard was a man of color until you brought it up via your 'race card' slur.
That could have some truth to it considering how bad you are with the evidence.

Or, you simply made that up 'on the fly'.

Thanks for the heads up.
You're welcome, the information has only been out there for 50+ years.

How is that even supposed to make any sense, LOL
> Your grade8 is showing

You post your nonsense and THEN try to fix it, otherwise the edits weren't time stamped
> I post YOUR nonsense and fix it, like your 'race card' denial.

That could have some truth to it considering how bad you are with the evidence.
> You lot keep claiming there's no evidence. Now there is? What took you so long?

Or, you simply made that up 'on the fly'.
> Keep guessing

'You're welcome, the information has only been out there for 50+ years.'
> I had no idea that Guinyard's skin color was that important to the assassination

---------------------
BONUS EDITS FOR
HIGH SCHOOL
DROP OUTS 
---------------------
> bolded text for easier
reading (it's a graphic
designer thing)
1:42AM EST
> cropped page in the
interest of bandwidth
conservation (it's a web
site designer thing)
1:46AM EST
> checked spelling,
grammar & sentence
construction (its a
writer and graphic
designer thing)
2:03AM EST
> added 'skin' to colour
re Guinyard and changed
'colour' to 'color' (English to
'American') for the education
deprived amongst us (aka CTers)
2:54AM EST
> accrued a number of time stamps,
which are a 'moveable feast'* (if you will)
amongst those who edit-on-the-fly.
(It's a professional writer thing)
OPEN-ENDED AM EST

*Cite Ernest Hemingway

[John Mytton]

or something,
I detect confusion, what's new?

but you fail to acknowledge all the other eyewitnesses who identified Oswald or an armed gunman moving in the same direction.
I failed to see indication of east/west sidewalk.

I detect confusion, what's new?

You got that right, the CT's view on what happened on the 22nd is the epitome of "confusion".

I failed to see indication of east/west sidewalk.

This is getting very tedious, what this tells me is that;
 It's another example where evidence wasn't altered by the FBI/WC.
 That Callaway and Guinyard didn't fraudulently collaborate on their observations.
 That 5 months later Guinyard was a little confused about what side of the road, big deal!
 That the totality of the eyewitnesses all essentially agree with each other.

JohnM