Arnold Rowland's view

[Dan O'meara]

Yes, I agree. I also believe that he most likely had shed his shirt and was wearing the white T-shirt while exposed to the warm sunlight coming through the windows. And I believe that it is probable that he changed shirts when at the rooming house. He told the police that he did. And another similar but lighter shirt was found in his room.

"I also believe that he most likely had shed his shirt and was wearing the white T-shirt"

This is refuted by most of the witnesses who see the man on the 6th floor. You can't just brush crucial eye-witness testimony under the carpet because it suits your erroneous beliefs.

[Mitch Todd]

I haven't paid a lot of attention to Arnold Rowland's testimony until very recently. One of the great aspects of having a 3-D computer model is being able to see how some things appear from various viewpoints. When reading Arnold Rowland's testimony, he is asked to describe, in great detail, the man he says that he saw with the rifle. So, I thought that this would be a good opportunity to test (with the 3-D computer model) whether or not he could have seen what he described. Here is some of his testimony:


Mr. SPECTER - What is your best recollection as to how far each of those windows were open?
Mr. ROWLAND - To the fullest extent that they could be opened.
Mr. SPECTER - What extent would that be?
Mr. ROWLAND - Being as I looked half frame windows, that would be halfway of the entire length of the window.
Mr. SPECTER - Is that the approximate status of those windows depicted here in Exhibit 356?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - In which of those double windows did you see the man and rifle?
Mr. ROWLAND - It was through the window to my right.
Mr. SPECTER - Draw an arrow right into that window with the same black pencil please.

(Witness marking.)

Mr. SPECTER - How much, if any, or all of that rifle could you see?
Mr. ROWLAND - All of it.
Mr. SPECTER - You could see from the base of the stock down to the tip of the end of the rifle?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - The barrel of the rifle?
.
.
.
Mr. SPECTER - In what manner was the rifle being held by the man whom you observed?
Mr. ROWLAND - The way he was standing it would have been in a position such as port arms in military terms.
Mr. SPECTER - When you say port arms you have positioned your left hand with the left elbow of your hand being about level with your shoulder and your right hand.--
Mr. ROWLAND - Not quite level with my shoulder, and the right hand being lower on the trigger of the stock.
Mr. SPECTER - So the waist of the imaginary rifle you would be holding would cross your body at about a 45-degree angle.
Mr. ROWLAND - That is correct.
Mr. SPECTER - How long was the rifle held in that position?
Mr. ROWLAND - During the entire time that I saw him there.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you see him hold it in any other position?
Mr. ROWLAND - No, I didn't.
.
.
.
Mr. SPECTER - What, if anything, did you observe as to the clothes he was wearing?
Mr. ROWLAND - He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway, and then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt under this, at least this is what it appeared to be. He had on dark slacks or blue jeans, I couldn't tell from that I didn't see but a small portion.
Mr. SPECTER - You say you only saw a small portion of what?
Mr. ROWLAND - Of his pants from his waist down.
Mr. SPECTER - Which half of the window was open, the bottom half or the top half?
Mr. ROWLAND - It was the bottom half.
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.
Mr. SPECTER - And what is your best recollection as to how close to the window he was standing?
Mr. ROWLAND - He wasn't next to the window, but he wasn't very far back. I would say 3 to 5 feet back from the window.
Mr. SPECTER - How much of the rifle was separated from your line of vision by the window?
Mr. ROWLAND - The entire rifle was in my view.
Mr. SPECTER - In the open part of the window?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - And how much of his body, if any, was in the open view where there was no window between your eyes and the object of his body?
Mr. ROWLAND - Approximately two-thirds of his body just below his waist.
Mr. SPECTER - Up to what point?
Mr. ROWLAND - Mid point between the waist and the knees, this is again in my proportion to his height that I make that judgment.
Mr. SPECTER - So from the waist, some point between his knees and his waist, you started to see hi clear in the window?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - And from that point how far up his body were you able to see without any obstruction of a window between you and him?
Mr. ROWLAND - To the top of his head. There was some space on top of that where I could see the wall behind him.


Sometimes the details (like the ones that Rowland describes) are what can help determine whether or not he invented the sighting. For example, if we could determine that it would have been impossible for Rowland to see some of these details, we could discount his story. Interestingly, my experiment appears to verify that Rowland actually could have seen the details as he describes them. Here is an image that was generated by the computer program from Rowland's viewpoint to the window he indicated in his testimony. The figure is a generic one that is in a suit and tie. I have no way to adjust the arms and hands. I did adjust the height of the figure to 5'9" and place it about 6' inside the window.




I am beginning to believe that Arnold Rowland could have seen LHO standing at this window a few minutes before the motorcade arrived. The area was clear due to the flooring work in progress.

One more important detail from Rowland's testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - And from that point how far up his body were you able to see without any obstruction of a window between you and him?
Mr. ROWLAND - To the top of his head. There was some space on top of that where I could see the wall behind him.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate of the space between the top of his head and the open window at the perspective you were observing?
Mr. ROWLAND - Two and a half, three feet, something on that--that is something very hard to ascertain. That would just be an estimation on my part.

Does your simulation show three feet of space between the top of the figure's head and the bottom of the open window sash? 30" of space between the figure's head and the sash? Hell, even 18" of space between the figure's head and the sash?

[Rick Plant]

What appears to me to be the pattern is that LHO was intentionally changing his appearance. This would be much like the main character in one of the new TV shows that LHO reportedly watched, "The Fugitive". It also appears to me that some of the witnesses might have mistaken one of his shirts (which was worn not tucked into his pants) as a jacket. In fact, not too many years after this happened, I remember jackets that were in style which were made to look like shirts which were not tucked in. I had a brown and navy-blue plaid one.

Are you saying that Oswald was wearing a "light blue" shirt and then changed into a reddish brown shirt after? 

[Charles Collins]

"I also believe that he most likely had shed his shirt and was wearing the white T-shirt"

This is refuted by most of the witnesses who see the man on the 6th floor. You can't just brush crucial eye-witness testimony under the carpet because it suits your erroneous beliefs.

Refuted by which eye-witness testimony?    You have already posted these, which appear to be consistent with a dingy white t-shirt to me:

Brennan and Fischer also describe his shirt as being a very light colour, possibly white but not quite. Fischer describes it as possibly light yellow Brennan describes it as a "dingy" white. Only Edwards flat out describes it as white.

[Charles Collins]

One more important detail from Rowland's testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - And from that point how far up his body were you able to see without any obstruction of a window between you and him?
Mr. ROWLAND - To the top of his head. There was some space on top of that where I could see the wall behind him.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate of the space between the top of his head and the open window at the perspective you were observing?
Mr. ROWLAND - Two and a half, three feet, something on that--that is something very hard to ascertain. That would just be an estimation on my part.

Does your simulation show three feet of space between the top of the figure's head and the bottom of the open window sash? 30" of space between the figure's head and the sash? Hell, even 18" of space between the figure's head and the sash?

I noticed that also. But it appears to me that he pretty much nailed so many other details. What I think could have happened to this one detail, is that Rowland wasn’t fully in sync with Specter regarding that aspect of the question. If you look through the upper window pane though, Rowland’s description works quite well with what the simulation shows.

[Charles Collins]

Are you saying that Oswald was wearing a "light blue" shirt and then changed into a reddish brown shirt after?

Only one witness that I am aware of described it as light blue. There is not any other evidence that I am aware of that indicates he had a light blue shirt on. Do you really think we should toss out all the other witness accounts and say Oswald was wearing a light blue shirt? 

[Dan O'meara]

I noticed that also. But it appears to me that he pretty much nailed so many other details. What I think could have happened to this one detail, is that Rowland wasn’t fully in sync with Specter regarding that aspect of the question. If you look through the upper window pane though, Rowland’s description works quite well with what the simulation shows.

It is abundantly clear Rowland misunderstood the question.
When asked what the distance was between the top of the man's head and the open window Rowland is trying to estimate how far away the man is standing from the window. He has already given this estimate a couple of questions before, 3 to 5 ft.
To imagine he is talking about a 3ft space above the man's head to where the open window was, is clearly not the correct interpretation of what he is saying.
When being asked about the SN window Rowland makes the following point:

Mr. Specter: How much of that window was open?
Mr. Rowland: It was open about that far.
Mr. Specter: Indicating 2 1/2 feet?
Mr. Rowland: Two feet.
Mr. Specter: Two feet.
Mr. Rowland: Indicating 2 feet. It looked like the windows might open 3--two-thirds or three-fourths of the distance.

Here is another example of how accurate some of Rowland's observations were.
He remembers the SN window was not fully opened, as opposed to the south-west windows which he described as being opened to their fullest extent. And this was indeed the case.
He estimates the SN window was opened about 2ft and that this was only two thirds or three quarters opened. So at his maximum estimation, the window opened to it's fullest extent would be 3ft (if 2ft was two thirds open).
It therefore makes absolutely no sense that he would then say there was a 3ft gap above a man he could see from the waist up!

Rowland is talking about seeing a man from the waist up through the estimated 3 ft gap of the south-west window opened to it's fullest extent.
It is clear Rowland misunderstood the question and was trying to estimate the distance between the man's head and the open window.