The Curious Case Of Arnold Rowland

[Jack Nessan]

You are a believer in the Miracle On Elm Street.
Arnold Rowland describes a man on the 6th floor of the TSBD carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle.
He describes the man as a white male, slender in proportion to his size, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Ronald Fischer describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Robert Edwards describes a white male, slender, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Howard Brennan describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/dingy white shirt.

Wow Mr Rowland! Take a bow.
By some incredible coincidence you've managed to describe the man in a way totally consistent with other witnesses.
If you were making up a Secret Service Agent, why not have him in a black suit?

Barbara Rowland reports that Arnold told her about the man with the rifle before the assassination.
Roger Craig reports Rowland telling him about a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
As does D V Harkness.
As does F M Turner.
As does Forest V Sorrels.

So, you believe that Arnold Rowland is running around telling everyone he can that there was a man on the 6th floor with a scoped rifle and that this was just a figment of his imagination and that it was just some unbelievably miraculous coincidence that there was indeed a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/white open-necked shirt carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
Not the 5th floor.
Or the fourth floor.

Have a think about that.

You believe that Rowland just happened to describe, by sheer luck, a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD, whose description perfectly fits that of other witnesses!

Is that what you actually believe?

BRW who was actually on the 6th floor states he could see all the way to the west wall and could see no one.

Barbara Rowland when she looks could not see anyone standing there. Rowland gives a description of a person framed in the window that is not even remotely possible given the construction of the window starting 14 inches off the ground. He made the whole story up for whatever his reasons were.

Barbara only stated Arnold told her this story for whatever his reason was but basically based on the conversation about Mr Stevenson"s visit. What she confirmed, which is what Specter suspicioned and BRW confirmed, was there was no person there and never was a person in the window.
------------------

Mrs. ROWLAND. Well, my husband and I were talking about Mr. Stevenson's visit and the way the people had acted, and we were talking about security measures, and he said he saw a man on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building, and when I looked up there I didn't see the man, because I didn't know exactly what window he was talking about at first.
And when I found out which window it was, the man had apparently stepped back, because I didn't see him.

Mr. BELIN. What do you mean "generally agree"? Did you see the man?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No; I didn't see the man but I said I guess that was what it was.


Mr. BALL. Did you see anyone else up there that day?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No, I did not.


Mr. DULLES. How much of the room could you see as you finished your lunch there? Was your view obstructed by boxes of books, or could you see a good bit of the sixth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, at the time I couldn't see too much of the sixth floor, because the books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing--as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building. But just one aisle, the aisle I was standing in I could see just about to the west side of the building. So far as seeing to the east and behind me, I could only see down the aisle behind me and the aisle to the west of me.



Mitch Todd gives an excellent analysis of who A. Rowland was, and how he fabricated a number of stories. Even his wife doesn't believe him. Maybe you shouldn't either. A Rowland when asked if he looked back at the window after hearing the shots cannot even give a straight answer to the question. He tells them first No, then Yes, then Maybe. The WC knew who he was, and Specter just allowed him to show it in his answers.

[Bill Chapman]

You are a believer in the Miracle On Elm Street.
Arnold Rowland describes a man on the 6th floor of the TSBD carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle.
He describes the man as a white male, slender in proportion to his size, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Ronald Fischer describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Robert Edwards describes a white male, slender, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Howard Brennan describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/dingy white shirt.

Wow Mr Rowland! Take a bow.
By some incredible coincidence you've managed to describe the man in a way totally consistent with other witnesses.
If you were making up a Secret Service Agent, why not have him in a black suit?

Barbara Rowland reports that Arnold told her about the man with the rifle before the assassination.
Roger Craig reports Rowland telling him about a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
As does D V Harkness.
As does F M Turner.
As does Forest V Sorrels.

So, you believe that Arnold Rowland is running around telling everyone he can that there was a man on the 6th floor with a scoped rifle and that this was just a figment of his imagination and that it was just some unbelievably miraculous coincidence that there was indeed a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/white open-necked shirt carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
Not the 5th floor.
Or the fourth floor.

Have a think about that.

You believe that Rowland just happened to describe, by sheer luck, a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD, whose description perfectly fits that of other witnesses!

Is that what you actually believe?

Rowland #ownz# you

[Dan O'meara]

BRW who was actually on the 6th floor states he could see all the way to the west wall and could see no one.

Barbara Rowland when she looks could not see anyone standing there. Rowland gives a description of a person framed in the window that is not even remotely possible given the construction of the window starting 14 inches off the ground. He made the whole story up for whatever his reasons were.

Barbara only stated Arnold told her this story for whatever his reason was but basically based on the conversation about Mr Stevenson"s visit. What she confirmed, which is what Specter suspicioned and BRW confirmed, was there was no person there and never was a person in the window.
------------------

Mrs. ROWLAND. Well, my husband and I were talking about Mr. Stevenson's visit and the way the people had acted, and we were talking about security measures, and he said he saw a man on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building, and when I looked up there I didn't see the man, because I didn't know exactly what window he was talking about at first.
And when I found out which window it was, the man had apparently stepped back, because I didn't see him.

Mr. BELIN. What do you mean "generally agree"? Did you see the man?
Mrs. ROWLAND. No; I didn't see the man but I said I guess that was what it was.


Mr. BALL. Did you see anyone else up there that day?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No, I did not.


Mr. DULLES. How much of the room could you see as you finished your lunch there? Was your view obstructed by boxes of books, or could you see a good bit of the sixth floor?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, at the time I couldn't see too much of the sixth floor, because the books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing--as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building. But just one aisle, the aisle I was standing in I could see just about to the west side of the building. So far as seeing to the east and behind me, I could only see down the aisle behind me and the aisle to the west of me.



Mitch Todd gives an excellent analysis of who A. Rowland was, and how he fabricated a number of stories. Even his wife doesn't believe him. Maybe you shouldn't either. A Rowland when asked if he looked back at the window after hearing the shots cannot even give a straight answer to the question. He tells them first No, then Yes, then Maybe. The WC knew who he was, and Specter just allowed him to show it in his answers.

So you too believe in the Miracle On Elm Street.
You believe that Rowland makes up a description of a man on the 6th floor that is almost exactly the same as three other eye-witnesses.
That he makes up a story about a man holding a scoped rifle on the 6th floor and by some miraculous coincidence there is indeed a man on the 6th floor with a scoped rifle.
You really believe that?

[Dan O'meara]

Rowland #ownz# you

It must be nice to believe in miracles.

[Alan Ford]

Rowland describes the man wearing a light coloured/ white shirt, as do Edwards, Fischer and Brennan. This is clothing Oswald did not wear that day and did not own. How did the WC deal with this inconvenient fact? - they just ignored it

Mr Rowland describes the other man wearing a bright plaid shirt. This is clothing Mr Bonnie Ray Williams did not wear that day. How do you deal with this inconvenient fact? - you just ignore it

[Mitch Todd]

You are a believer in the Miracle On Elm Street.

You keep repeating this, like it's some comforting mantra. Unfortunately it proves nothing.

Arnold Rowland describes a man on the 6th floor of the TSBD carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle.
He describes the man as a white male, slender in proportion to his size, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Ronald Fischer describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Robert Edwards describes a white male, slender, wearing a white/light coloured open-necked shirt.
Howard Brennan describes a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/dingy white shirt.

Wow Mr Rowland! Take a bow.
By some incredible coincidence you've managed to describe the man in a way totally consistent with other witnesses.
If you were making up a Secret Service Agent, why not have him in a black suit?

There are a couple more details that apply here.

Robert Edwards described the man as having "light brown" hair. Ron Fischer said that the man he and Edwards saw was "light-headed."  The man whom Rowland claimed to see had "dark hair" that was "probably black." (Euins and Brennan didn't notice or remember the hair colort of the man they saw shooting from the window.)

Edwards and Fischer noted that the man they saw was hunkered down to the point that one remarked that "he must be hiding from somebody." Rowland claimed that he saw a man standing up in front of a window, proudly displaying a rifle.

Now, anyone wanting to conjure up a g-man on a special security detail in a bulding overlooking some public space isn't going to just assemble a description from random bits an pieces. The role implies certain characteristics as to the kind of person it would be, how they dressed, and what tools they used. In Rowland's case, Hollywood already did a lot of the work for him. As he noted in his deposition, "[w]e had seen in the movies before where they have security men up in windows and places like that with rifles to watch the crowds." The location and tool had already been supplied on-screen. The rest falls in place fairly quickly after that. That kind of "security agent" would be epxected to be trim (the SWAT guys are expected to be men of action; no expects the SWAT team to be corpulent or scrawny), and not be wearing a buttoned up collar (since when do the SWAT guys SWAT in 3-piece suits? Or was this to a be a strictly formal assassination?). The role Rowland set for the guy leads straight to a very narrow range of reasonable descriptions. The only range of choices involve colors: the color of the man's shirt, pants, hair, complexion. Rowland got the hair wrong. The choices for shirt color boil down to "light" and "dark" in this case, but that means any random guess would be right half the time.

In short, Where Rowland's description of the man parallels Fischer's and Edwards', it would be expected for Rowland's description to be close, even if Rowland just made the hte man up out of thin air. Rowland doesn't do so well on the aspects that would be expected to be more prone to chance. The kicker is that the man Rowland claims to have seen behaves fundamentally differently than the man that Edwards and Fischer saw. Not to mention the other issues with Rowland's story that have already been brought up.

Barbara Rowland reports that Arnold told her about the man with the rifle before the assassination.
Roger Craig reports Rowland telling him about a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD.
As does D V Harkness.
As does F M Turner.
As does Forest V Sorrels.

So, you believe that Arnold Rowland is running around telling everyone he can that there was a man on the 6th floor with a scoped rifle and that this was just a figment of his imagination and that it was just some unbelievably miraculous coincidence that there was indeed a white male, slender, short hair, wearing a light coloured/white open-necked shirt carrying a high-powered, scoped rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD?
Not the 5th floor.
Or the fourth floor.


Have a think about that.

You might want to consider that Rowland lied repeatedly in his deposition, just in his self-description, in areas where there was no reason for him to lie. That is to say, he repeatedly perjured himself, and did so on the biggest stage for it that can be imagined. At least he's pretty bold about it. Someone who will do that will lie to anyone. And telling the same lie to 10 or 100 or 1000 people doesn't put the lie any closer to the truth.

You believe that Rowland just happened to describe, by sheer luck, a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD, whose description perfectly fits that of other witnesses!

Is that what you actually believe?

As I've said before, there really isn't all that much luck involved, if you really think about it. And in the parts where luck actually did matter, Rowland doesn't do so well.

And there are still the issues with Rowland moving the gunman, adding the "elderly negro" late in the game, and the impossible 18" gap between the man's head and the bottom of the window sill.

[Rick Plant]

Arnold Rowland's voluntary statement.

[Jack Nessan]

So you too believe in the Miracle On Elm Street.
You believe that Rowland makes up a description of a man on the 6th floor that is almost exactly the same as three other eye-witnesses.
That he makes up a story about a man holding a scoped rifle on the 6th floor and by some miraculous coincidence there is indeed a man on the 6th floor with a scoped rifle.
You really believe that?

It doesn’t matter if you like the WC or not, it is absolutely appalling to read his testimony and realize he thought so little of the whole affair that he felt he could make up whatever he wanted and waste everyone’s time. He screws the description of the man with the rifle in the frame of the window so bad that he is asked if he was ever in the TSBD. The WC members knew the configuration of the windows and knew how totally wrong his description was. The window starts 14 inches above the floor.

Mr. Specter.
And how much, if any, of his body was obscured by the window frame from that point down to the floor?
Mr. Rowland.
From where I was standing I could see from his head to about 6 inches below his waist, below his belt.
Mr. Specter.
Could you see as far as his knees?
Mr. Rowland.
No.
----------------------------------------------

Rowland does not describe anyone. He describes this person as a heavy 200 lb slender man that weighs approximately 140 lbs and he is either tall or maybe not. He describes an individual standing with his left hand on the upper rifle stock with both his left hand and elbow at shoulder height. He then goes on to describe the rifle as pointing to the wall. Which is impossible because the wall is to his right not left. Rowland describes the man holding the rifle entirely different but states he held it that way the whole time.


“Mr. ROWLAND - He was rather slender in proportion to his size. I couldn't tell for sure whether he was tall and maybe, you know heavy, say 200 pounds, but tall whether he would be and slender or whether he was medium and slender, but in proportion to his size his build was slender.”

-----------------------------------

“Mr. SPECTER - Were you able to form any opinion as to the weight of the man in addition to the line of proportion which you have already described?
Mr. ROWLAND - I would say about 140 to 150 pounds”


Mr. SPECTER - Could you give us an estimate on his height?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; I couldn't. That is why I said I can't state what height he would be. He was just slender in build in proportion with his width. This is something I find myself doing all the time, comparing things in perspective.
Mr. SPECTER - Was he a white man or a Negro or what?
Mr. ROWLAND - Seemed, well, I can't state definitely from my position because it was more or less not fully light or bright in the room. He appeared to be fair complexioned, not fair, but light complexioned, but dark hair.

Mr. SPECTER - What race was he then?
Mr. ROWLAND - I would say either a light Latin or a Caucasian.

The thing that should be remembered is there are pictures of the witnesses were together at the Dallas Sheriff's office and could hear each other give statements.