Why are the CT's so obsessed with disproving the innocent Bus and Cab rides?

[Alan Ford]

Huh? Was the lady trying to get in Oswald's cab in the Public Domain or not? And how about the North Beckley journey, that you conveniently edited out? LMFAO!

JohnM

Oswald's cab? You're losing it, Mr Mytton!

Now, first things first: the lady trying to get in the cab was not in the public domain, but nor was it in any domain. How exactly is this "specific information" an impressive demonstration of the veracity of Mr Whaley's story?

[Alan Ford]

Question! How come Mr Whaley's affidavit only describes a "dark shirt"? Why is he not yet able to give its color?

Reasonable Answer! He's only seen the arrest shirt in black and white!

Follow-Up Question! Under what circumstances might one be expected to see a given colored object only in black and white?

 

[Tom Scully]

...
Mr. FRITZ. .... I asked him what happened there when he caught the cab and he said there was a lady trying to catch a cab and he told the busdriver, the busdriver told him to tell the lady to catch the cab behind him and he said he rode that cab over near his home, he rode home in a cab.

....
JohnM

I'm having trouble understanding your argument....

https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/mcwatters.htm
...
Mr. BALL - Do you remember what he said to you when he asked you for the transfer?
Mr. McWATTERS - Well, the reason I recall the incident, I had--there was a lady that when I stopped in this traffic, there was a lady who had a suitcase and she said, "I have got to make a 1 o'clock train at Union Station," and she said, "I don't believe from the looks of this traffic you are going to be held up."
She said, "Would you give me a transfer and I am going to walk on down," which is about from where I was at that time about 7 or 8 blocks to Union Station and she asked me if I would give her a transfer in case I did get through the traffic if I would pick her up on the way.
So, I said, "I sure will." So I gave her a transfer and opened the door and as she was going out the gentleman I had picked up about 2 blocks asked for a transfer and got off at the same place in the middle of the block where the lady did.
Mr. BALL - Where was that near, what intersection?
Mr. McWATTERS - It was the intersection near Lamar Street, it was near Poydras and Lamar Street. It is a short block, but the main intersection there is Lamar Street.
Mr. BALL - He had been on the bus about 2 blocks?
Mr. McWATTERS - About 2 blocks; yes, sir. ...

[John Mytton]

Oswald's cab? You're losing it, Mr Mytton!

Now, first things first: the lady trying to get in the cab was not in the public domain, but nor was it in any domain. How exactly is this "specific information" an impressive demonstration of the veracity of Mr Whaley's story?

but nor was it in any domain.

Exactly, it was exclusive information only known to Whaley and Oswald, thanks for proving my point.

JohnM

[Alan Ford]

Exactly, it was exclusive information only known to Whaley and Oswald, thanks for proving my point.

JohnM

Mr Mytton, I know what you call "proof" tends to be thin gruel, but your circular, anachronistic argument above is poor even by your standards!

Here's our chronology:

1. Mr Whaley tells the "investigating" authorities about a lady trying to get in his cab

2. AFTER this, according to the interrogation report, Mr Oswald admits to having taken a cab and confirms Mr Whaley's story about the lady

You, being a Warren Gullible, assume that Mr Oswald really said this
I, not being a Warren Gullible, advise caution with that naive assumption

And you really have no defeater for my argument--------beyond a mindless Warren Gullible assurance that "The investigating authorities would never lie, they were devoted servants of truth and justice"

In sum: As with the supah-dupah-impressive physical details you made so much of before their probative value imploded in your hands, you've got nothing here! 

[John Mytton]

Mr Mytton, I know what you call "proof" tends to be thin gruel, but your circular, anachronistic argument above is poor even by your standards!

Here's our chronology:

1. Mr Whaley tells the "investigating" authorities about a lady trying to get in his cab

2. AFTER this, according to the interrogation report, Mr Oswald admits to having taken a cab and confirms Mr Whaley's story about the lady

You, being a Warren Gullible, assume that Mr Oswald really said this
I, not being a Warren Gullible, advise caution with that naive assumption

And you really have no defeater for my argument--------beyond a mindless Warren Gullible assurance that "The investigating authorities would never lie, they were devoted servants of truth and justice"

In sum: As with the supah-dupah-impressive physical details you made so much of before their probative value imploded in your hands, you've got nothing here! 

Wow, so much unproven conjecture and all without even a scintilla of evidence to support this ever increasing level of paranoia, and when you have no answers to what is in fact my "supah-dupah" arguments of evidence that only Whaley exclusively knew that wasn't in the public domain, you suddenly shift the goalposts and now you're reduced to this new level of absurd arrogance that all the inconvenient witnesses lied and all the problematic evidence was manufactured, go away and try and convince someone/anyone of your unsubstantiated ideas and let's see how far that gets you.

In sum: As with the supah-dupah-impressive physical details you made so much of before their probative value imploded in your hands, you've got nothing here!

What a pathetic attempt to score points, I was the one who first EDITED my previous post and directed you to the EDITED post and I was the one who first posted the non Dallas newspaper and all the newspaper's thereafter and I was the one who first admitted that Whaley could have gained information from the newspaper article, that is if the same info was published in Dallas and when the tables were turned and I posted non public domain evidence that only Whaley and Oswald knew, you alter the rules and make endless unprovable paranoid claims in a weak attempt to defend your untenable position.

Btw if Fritz was going to lie why would he lie about an insignificant cab ride which only gets Oswald from "A" to "B"? Wouldn't it be to his and the rest of the conspirators benefit to say any or all of the following?

Oswald admitted owning the rifle.
Oswald admitted hating Kennedy.
Oswald admitted going to Mexico.
Oswald admitted carrying a large package.
Oswald admitted that the backyard photos were actually Oswald.

JohnM

[Walt Cakebread]

Mr Mytton, I know what you call "proof" tends to be thin gruel, but your circular, anachronistic argument above is poor even by your standards!

Here's our chronology:

1. Mr Whaley tells the "investigating" authorities about a lady trying to get in his cab

2. AFTER this, according to the interrogation report, Mr Oswald admits to having taken a cab and confirms Mr Whaley's story about the lady

You, being a Warren Gullible, assume that Mr Oswald really said this
I, not being a Warren Gullible, advise caution with that naive assumption

And you really have no defeater for my argument--------beyond a mindless Warren Gullible assurance that "The investigating authorities would never lie, they were devoted servants of truth and justice"

In sum: As with the supah-dupah-impressive physical details you made so much of before their probative value imploded in your hands, you've got nothing here! 

Mr. FRITZ. .... I asked him what happened there when he caught the cab and he said there was a lady trying to catch a cab and he told the busdriver, the busdriver told him to tell the lady to catch the cab behind him and he said he rode that cab over near his home, he rode home in a cab.

Lee couldn't have arrived at the Greyhound Taxi stand prior to 12:48....  When he got in a CITY cab a woman approached and asked the driver to call her a cab....   


Fritz told Whaley that Lee Oswald claimed that a woman asked the driver to call her a taxi, and asked Whaley if he remember that incident......Whaley said , yes, he recalled a woman asking him to call her a taxi.... and so he did,  he said  "Ok Lady you're a taxi "

[Walt Cakebread]

Clearly?



Btw Found the Dallas Newspaper with that photo yet, -------keep looking!  Thumb1

JohnM

Perhaps Whaley did see an ID bracelet on the wrist of his passenger who was wearing a BLUE JACKET and BLUE trousers.
ID Bracelets were very common ......  a large percentage of young men wore them....


But the Fact remains Lee Oswald could not have been Whaley's passenger because Lee was wearing a reddish brown shirt with a BUTTON DOWN COLLAR and he was NOT wearing a BLUE JACKET.   And in addition to the clothing problem....The WC investigators determined that Lee Oswald couldn't have arrived at the taxi stand at the Greyhound bus depot any earlier than 12:48.    Whaley said that it was 12:30 when he started to go into the depot to buy a package of cigarettes and it was at that time that he noticed the young man who was wearing a BLUE JACKET approaching his cab.

Luckily the WC provided us with a nice overview of Oswald's (alleged) movements on page 158 of their report:

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0091b.htm

The WC investigators found that Lee Oswald had not yet departed from the TSBD at 12:33 ( 12:33 is about the time that Whaley departed from the Greyhound bus depot with the young man who was wearing a BLUE JACKET.)   The Wc investigators found that Lee Oswald boarded Mc Watter's bus at 12:40, and disembarked at 12:44.    They found that Lee Oswald then walked the two blocks to the Greyhound bus depot taxi stand and enter a CITY cab at 12:48.   Just as Lee was climbing into the cab a lady approached and asked the driver if he would call a cab for her.  Lee was dressed in a reddish brown shirt and dark grey trousers.   

Lee told Captain Fritz that he and the taxi driver talked as they rode along and the driver told him that JFK had been shot.  This clashes with Whaley's statement that his passenger was taciturn and unresponsive to his attempt at creating a conversation. Whaley said that He mentioned the sirens wailing in the vicinity and inquired if the man knew the reason for the sirens.   Clearly Whaley didn't know that JFK's motorcade was traveling down Main and the lead elements had their sirens wailing.  The question from Whaley also time stamps the event at about 12:30. Lee told Captain Fritz that the taxi fare was 85 cents, and Whaley said that the fare for his passenger was 95 cents.   85 cents is the correct fare for the 2.2 mile  trip.  There are many contradictions between Whaley's tale and Lee Oswald's account of his taxi ride.....   And the logical conclusion is....   Whaley was a big BSer.... and Lee Oswald was not his passenger.