Why are Warren Report Defenders Trusting of testimony RE: TSBD to Texas Theatre?

[Richard Smith]

Because it speaks to his credibility and to the state of his mental health. If he "vandalized" history, is this "vandalism" of his grave?

The taxi driver abandoned his small son, for life, who carried his name
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Whaley-18
...and he was bold enough to correct the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS over an insignificant detail. The jury is still out as to whether he told Dallas reporters he was an awarded WWII combat hero, but in fact, was not.

Not 25 miles to Lewisville, but precisely 26, not 36 years driving a taxi, but precisely 37. :The "keeper" of Whaley's online memorial has created and maintains over 25,000 such web pages. He replied in just a couple of days to the evidence I shared with him supporting the incorrect date of birth...


https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/13730776/william-wayne-whaley


Published June 26, 1908, refers to "ten pound boy" arriving at the home of O.W. Whaley on the prior Friday evening, AKA, June 19, 1908. The article image is now in the image gallery of the Whaley grave page.

You are really going on and on about Whaley's credibility based over a discrepancy as to his date of birth?  Suggesting his testimony about giving Oswald a ride should be discounted because he got his year of birth wrong?  Maybe it's difficult to imagine for an information hoarder but in the early 20th century it is not inconceivable for someone not to know their exact birth year.  They certainly didn't have access to the Internet.  Records were lost.  Memories were subject to error.  And it didn't really matter that much to anyone without a compulsion disorder.

[Tom Scully]

You are really going on and on about Whaley's credibility based over a discrepancy as to his date of birth?  Suggesting his testimony about giving Oswald a ride should be discounted because he got his year of birth wrong?  Maybe it's difficult to imagine for an information hoarder but in the early 20th century it is not inconceivable for someone not to know their exact birth year.  They certainly didn't have access to the Internet.  Records were lost.  Memories were subject to error.  And it didn't really matter that much to anyone without a compulsion disorder.

An "information hoarder"? Whaley himself and the 1910, 1920, 1930, and 1940 U.S. Census records and these examples provided by Whaley himself, as well as his family's bible were remarkably consistent supporting what is inarguably Whaley's true birth year, 1940. Something happened after 1940, and history has a right to know, or at least reflect a change from 1908 to 1905 that took place.

His mom outlived him by eighteen months. She and the Whaley family bible were available, vs the
post 1940 process of creating a new birth year.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/53993969/lona-haynes-whaley

Published 1935 LINK, Phillips Family History, pg. 127


IOW, there was no documentation to support such a change, but Whaley's SS record, death certificate, and presumably the Texas driver's license he was carrying when he was suddenly killed all reflect the revised birth year.

It is important because his testimony, as was that of Earline Roberts and Mary Bledsoe, was uncorroborated.

Whaley's parents married in 1907. His mother was 19 in 1908. One CT zealot reacted to these facts years ago by making up a scenario in which Whaley "switched" to 1908 to shield his family from embarrassment over his actual "out of wedlock" 1905 birth, when his conception would have to have been when his mother was just 15 years old.

But that wasn't what happened, Whaley was born in 1908 at least until 1940, them switched to 1905.
That requires some effort since a consistent record supporting 1908 already existed and no evidence supporting 1905.

1908 to 1931 = 23 years....

[Walt Cakebread]

Because it speaks to his credibility and to the state of his mental health. If he "vandalized" history, is this "vandalism" of his grave?

The taxi driver abandoned his small son, for life, who carried his name
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Whaley-18
...and he was bold enough to correct the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS over an insignificant detail. The jury is still out as to whether he told Dallas reporters he was an awarded WWII combat hero, but in fact, was not.

Not 25 miles to Lewisville, but precisely 26, not 36 years driving a taxi, but precisely 37. :The "keeper" of Whaley's online memorial has created and maintains over 25,000 such web pages. He replied in just a couple of days to the evidence I shared with him supporting the incorrect date of birth...


https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/13730776/william-wayne-whaley


Published June 26, 1908, refers to "ten pound boy" arriving at the home of O.W. Whaley on the prior Friday evening, AKA, June 19, 1908. The article image is now in the image gallery of the Whaley grave page.

Perhaps Whaley changed the date of his birth to so he could draw a pension that required that he be three years older than his actual age ?

At any rate.... This seems to indicate that Whaley was less than an honest man....    And the tale that he fabricated about transporting the assassin to Oak Cliff  so that he could have his "5 minutes of fame " certainly is nothing but a figment of his warped mind.

[Richard Smith]

Perhaps Whaley changed the date of his birth to so he could draw a pension that required that he be three years older than his actual age ?

At any rate.... This seems to indicate that Whaley was less than an honest man....    And the tale that he fabricated about transporting the assassin to Oak Cliff  so that he could have his "5 minutes of fame " certainly is nothing but a figment of his warped mind.

It's very silly to speculate about Whaley's motivations and then extrapolate from a discrepancy about his birth year that he fabricated a cab ride for Oswald.  Particularly when Whaley kept records that supports his account.  Classic rabbit hole nonsense.   

[Walt Cakebread]

Whaley's records precludes Oswald from being his passenger.

Only a deranged Nutter would claim that.

So what's new?

Whaley's records precludes Oswald from being his passenger.


Hey c'mon Otto.... Yer stealin my rebuttal again...

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, sorry, I was lurking...

Well let's flesh this reply out a bit...

Whaley's records precludes Oswald from being his passenger.

Whaley's trip manifest indicates that picked up the man who was wearing a Blue jacket and trousers at 12:30 and delivered that man to 500 N. Beckley at 12:45.   

The WC investigators determined that Lee was at the TSBD at 12:33 and ten walked east on Elm street and boarded a bus, but the bus became stuck in traffic and Lee got off the bus at 12:44. He then walked to the Greyhound bus station taxi stand and hired a taxi ( time 12:48 ) to take him to the rooming house.

So Lee was just beginning his taxi ride three minutes after Whaley discharged the man who was dressed entirely differently than Lee Oswald.

So even if Whaley made the entries after the trip and merely separated the trips into 15 minute intervals Lee wasn't even in a taxi at 12:33 when Whaley estimated his passenger climbed into his cab..... And Whaley had already discharged his passenger at the time that Lee was just getting into a taxi.

[Mark A. Oblazney]

An "information hoarder"? Whaley himself and the 1910, 1920, 1930, and 1940 U.S. Census records and these examples provided by Whaley himself, as well as his family's bible were remarkably consistent supporting what is inarguably Whaley's true birth year, 1940. Something happened after 1940, and history has a right to know, or at least reflect a change from 1908 to 1905 that took place.

His mom outlived him by eighteen months. She and the Whaley family bible were available, vs the
post 1940 process of creating a new birth year.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/53993969/lona-haynes-whaley

Published 1935 LINK, Phillips Family History, pg. 127


IOW, there was no documentation to support such a change, but Whaley's SS record, death certificate, and presumably the Texas driver's license he was carrying when he was suddenly killed all reflect the revised birth year.

It is important because his testimony, as was that of Earline Roberts and Mary Bledsoe, was uncorroborated.

Whaley's parents married in 1907. His mother was 19 in 1908. One CT zealot reacted to these facts years ago by making up a scenario in which Whaley "switched" to 1908 to shield his family from embarrassment over his actual "out of wedlock" 1905 birth, when his conception would have to have been when his mother was just 15 years old.

But that wasn't what happened, Whaley was born in 1908 at least until 1940, them switched to 1905.
That requires some effort since a consistent record supporting 1908 already existed and no evidence supporting 1905.

1908 to 1931 = 23 years....

Why do your sourced discrepancies with these issues elecit such consternation among the faithful readers, Tom?  Suspicious bloodlines shall be your redemption ten years from now.  I, for one, find them fascinating.  Difficult to follow, but aren't most 'treasure hunts'?

[Walt Cakebread]

Why do your sourced discrepancies with these issues elecit such consternation among the faithful readers, Tom?  Suspicious bloodlines shall be your redemption ten years from now.  I, for one, find them fascinating.  Difficult to follow, but aren't most 'treasure hunts'?

I fail to see the relevance of Whaley changing his birth date.....   How is that related to the tale about how he had transported Lee Oswald to Oakcliff that afternoon.....   The changing of his birth date certainly does seem to establish that Whaley was a bold and blatant liar, so in that aspect it serves to cast serious doubt on his statements about transporting Lee Oswald to  Oakcliff that afternoon.