Let me put it this way:
Barry Ernst say's that she signed it and that it's her handwriting on the document. From what I see, the handwriting for "there" was made by the same had as the signature on the last page. As such, there is no reason not assign "there" and the signature and the other writing as Adams'. If you want to argue that it's not Adams' writing on that page, or any other, you're free to do so. But don't think anyone else is going to notice unless you can provide any evidence.
Remember this?
And finally it should be noted that on 04/04/64 WC assistant counsel Leon Hubert wrote a remarkable memo in which he refered to a recent staff meeting in which he had objected to what he called "editing of the transcripts of depositions". In the same memo he also complains about the practice of waiving signatures by the witnesses and advocates to have witnesses read and sign the transcript even if it contains errors, which according to him can later be rectified.
Now, isn't it just remarkable that Victoria Adams initially waived signing her testimony, as that would save her from having to return to sign it, only to be confronted by somebody at work a few days later who insisted she would sign after all. And isn't it just as remarkable that Victoria Adams told Barry Ernest that she never testified that she saw Shelley and Lovelady on the first floor?
Btw, How do you reconcile these two statements?;
Adams handwritten corrections and signature on the original transcript trump any objection that you or Ernst can come up with. If she signed off on it, that's what she said that she said. BTW, Lovelady did mention seeing a woman on the first floor. While he said he couldn't swear that it was Adams, but he didn't say that it wasn't have been her. Just because Adams saw and recognized Lovelady and Shelly on the first floor doesn't mean that they were looking in the right direction or paying attention at the right time.
Barry Ernst say's that she signed it and that it's her handwriting on the document.Amazing, isn't it? You rely on Ernest for confirming that Adams signed the document, yet at the same time you dismiss whatever else Adams told Ernest....
If she signed off on it, that's what she said that she said.Sure about that? Perhaps you should have a closer look at WC assistant counsel Leon Hubert's memo.....
And you seem to be struggling to make up your mind about Dorothy Garner as well;
First you dismiss what Garner said by qualifying a letter from the office of a United States Attorney to the Chief Counsel of a Presidential Commission as "hearsay"
The one thing that's clear about the Stroud letter is that it's hearsay. We don't really know exactly what she said to Stroud. We know that Truly said he ran into an officer on the 4th floor as he was descending.
Then you have the ladies (by which I pressume you mean Adams, Styles and Garner) nowhere near the stairs, implying that Garner made up what she told Stroud (and Barry Ernest)
As for what Our Ladies of the Fourth Floor would have heard, it may not have been anything from near the stairs if they were still at the window in the office and so attuned to the activity on the ground below and/or their own chatter.
And then you have Garner simply misinterpreting what she saw, when she was at the stairs;
For my "alternative timeline" to work, all I need are two things:
1.) For Adams to have left later than she remembered (IIRC, Styles thought it was minutes, not seconds, after the last shot was fired)
2.) for Garner to have misinterpreted seeing a later pairing of Truly and a DPD officer with the original Truly/Baker stairmaster episode.
So, what is it? Was Garner not near the stairs? Or was she near the stairs but lied to Stroud, or did Stroud perhaps lie to Rankin? Or was she near the stairs and saw Truly coming down and somehow figured he was coming up?
And how about this beauty;
For my "alternative timeline" to work, all I need are two things:
1.) For Adams to have left later than she remembered (IIRC, Styles thought it was minutes, not seconds, after the last shot was fired)
2.) for Garner to have misinterpreted seeing a later pairing of Truly and a DPD officer with the original Truly/Baker stairmaster episode.
Only to say a little bit later;
I don't think you can really make a simple timeline out of all this.
So, on the one hand you claim your timeline would work, and on the other hand you say you can't make a simple timeline. Pray tell, how can a timeline, you say you can't make, still work?
Apart from the obvious fact that you are making a number of erroneous assumptions - the main one being that the officer who told Adams to return to the building was Harkness - the real reason why you can't make a simple timeline is that the parts you've challenged in my timeline don't compute with the other known facts making it impossible to make a conclusive timeline.
Btw, the officer that told Adams to return to the building would IMO never have allowed her to run to the front of the building, if he was indeed locking down the building. Instead he would have told her to go back in the same way she came out (at the back) where he could have seen her go in, rather than risking she would not re-enter, out of his sight, at the front entrance.
