No, the title--------as has already been explained-----------refers to THE roll call that supposedly identified Mr Oswald as uniquely and suspiciously missing ~1 pm. That never happened.
Therefore, the claim is NOT, as you have claimed, "that there was no roll call, early or otherwise"
There is nothing in the article that "-refers to THE roll call that supposedly identified Mr Oswald as uniquely and suspiciously missing ~1 pm. That never happened."
You have simply made this up (as per usual)
But there was a roll call, a taking of names, the question is, was Truly throwing Oswald under the bus before the roll call?