The Patsy

[Dan O'meara]

billchapman

It is the great weakness of the LNer narrative that almost every piece of evidence relating to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:

Four of the five witnesses describe the man on the 6th floor wearing clothes Oswald didn't wear that day and didn't own.

Euins describes a "bald spot" Oswald didn't have.

Brennan describes a man with a squarer jaw than Oswald who appeared to be at least 5 years older than Oswald and who stood at the window admiring his handiwork as the limo drove through the underpass when the WC has Oswald rushing away from the SN to make his rendezvous with Baker with three seconds to spare.

The three men on the 5th floor don't hear anyone rushing about inches above their heads.

The perfectly positioned Garner doesn't see Oswald supposedly rushing down the stairs.

Oswald places himself in the Domino Room at the time of the shooting which is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman entering the TSBD and making their way round to the west elevator.

Rowland spots the man with the rifle at the west end of the 6th floor when he's supposed to be hiding in the SN.

But he can't be in the SN because Rowland spots a black male in the SN window at a time when BRW is having his lunch on the 6th floor, the remains of which are found on top of the SN (eight officers confirming the lunch remains were found at the SN).

This black male disappears a few minutes before the motorcade arrives mirroring BRW's known movements.

Got a graphic for that Bill?

[Zeon Mason]

If there are solutions for the problems of the rusty barrel MC rifle and Mrs Garner on the 4th floor, and the uncertain PrayerMan=Oswald? ,  then it would be possible to offer a theory that Oswald pre-planted an MC rifle on Nov 21/ 63 under a wooden pallet stacked full with boxes on the 6th floor.

Then on Friday morning Nov 22/63 , Oswald brought  in a semi auto rifle disassembled that fit in a 24” bag so that Frazier would see the bag and note how Oswald carried it between arm pit and cup of his hand.

Then the anomalies of rifle mail order Paper trail and the fake ID dropped at the Tippet scene and the apparent impossibility of Oswald traveling 0.9 mile in only 4-5 minutes, may also be purposefully planned to make it appear Oswald was being set up.

If Oswald had  accomplice(s) it gets even easier to resolve some of these anomalies.

If Oswald had a near double counterpart as his accomplice then even PM = Oswald is possible while the other Oswald does the shooting on the 6th floor.

Getting the semi auto rifle out of the TSBD would not be difficult if the rifle had folding stock and short barrel as it could be hidden under a jacket or behind the back underneath a loose long sleeve shirt using a sling.

The matter of Mrs Garner by the 4th floor staircase could be resolved if Mrs Garners perception of how quickly she followed Adams and Styles was longer (ie: >65sec) and that the noise she heard on the staircase was actually Oswald.(or other shooter)

The reason for this complicated plan was because Oswald wanted the fame as a suspect assassin, defended by a famous attorney in a lengthy trial( probably televised) during which the entire world would see Oswald as a patsy, who was acquitted. Oswald would then sue the authorities , gaining himself even more fame as well as potential fortune.

[Bill Chapman]

SMH. When he said "I'm just a patsy," he didn't mean he was set up for the crime. He meant that the only reason they were interested in him was because of his connection to the Soviet Union.

Agreed. He said something to the tune of 'They brought me in because I've lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a PATSY'.

Of course CTers get all excited, wetting themselves while desperately attempting to rip the patsy thing away from what Oswald actually meant with the Soviet Union reference.

[Bill Chapman]

It is the great weakness of the LNer narrative that almost every piece of evidence relating to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
_Oswald pointed himself out the door immediately and created the evidence as he went along

Four of the five witnesses describe the man on the 6th floor wearing clothes Oswald didn't wear that day and didn't own.
_Thank god he wore some clothes. I can see the headlines: 'Pervert Snuffs President'

Euins describes a "bald spot" Oswald didn't have.
_'White spot'

Brennan describes a man with a squarer jaw than Oswald who appeared to be at least 5 years older than Oswald and who stood at the window admiring his handiwork as the limo drove through the underpass when the WC has Oswald rushing away from the SN to make his rendezvous with Baker with three seconds to spare.
_I missed the memo on the 'squarer jaw'. And Oswald was not exactly fresh-faced to begin with. And can you confirm that Oswald watched long enough to see them 'go through the underpass' from this: Brennan-"He drew the gun back from the window as though he was drawing it back to his side and maybe paused for another second as though to assure himself that he hit his mark, and then he disappeared.”

The three men on the 5th floor don't hear anyone rushing about inches above their heads.
_Were they actually listening for somebody 'rushing'? (Btw, how high were those ceilings?) The 3 Amigos seemed more interested in getting over to the west window.

The perfectly positioned Garner doesn't see Oswald supposedly rushing down the stairs.
_Then Oswald fooled her. And was she actually listening or watching for somebody coming down the stairs? Did she know enough about what was going on to expect an appearance by a shooter?

Oswald places himself in the Domino Room at the time of the shooting which is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman entering the TSBD and making their way round to the west elevator.
_Oswald said a lot of things

Rowland spots the man with the rifle at the west end of the 6th floor when he's supposed to be hiding in the SN.
_Seems Oswald took a last check of shooting-position choice

But he can't be in the SN because Rowland spots a black male in the SN window at a time when BRW is having his lunch on the 6th floor, the remains of which are found on top of the SN (eight officers confirming the lunch remains were found at the SN).
_Rowland said a lot of things

This black male disappears a few minutes before the motorcade arrives mirroring BRW's known movements.
_'Dun-dun-dun' (cue dramatic music)

Got a graphic for that Bill?
_Got a word-salad for that, Dan?


billchapman


Let there be light


billchapman

[Dan O'meara]

It is the great weakness of the LNer narrative that almost every piece of evidence relating to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald:
_Oswald pointed himself out the door immediately and created the evidence as he went along

Cool 

Four of the five witnesses describe the man on the 6th floor wearing clothes Oswald didn't wear that day and didn't own.
_Thank god he wore some clothes. I can see the headlines: 'Pervert Snuffs President'

It would be better for you if the shooter were wearing clothes that Oswald actually owned, but he wasn't, demonstrating Oswald was not the man on the 6th floor.

Euins describes a "bald spot" Oswald didn't have.
_'White spot'

Come on, Bill:
"I seen a bald spot on this man's head, trying to look out the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald spot. I could see his hand, you know the rifle laying across in his hand. And I could see his hand sticking out on the trigger part. And after he got through, he just pulled it back in the window."

Euins sees a bald spot on top of the shooter's head. Demonstrating it wasn't Oswald

Brennan describes a man with a squarer jaw than Oswald who appeared to be at least 5 years older than Oswald and who stood at the window admiring his handiwork as the limo drove through the underpass when the WC has Oswald rushing away from the SN to make his rendezvous with Baker with three seconds to spare.
_I missed the memo on the 'squarer jaw'. And Oswald was not exactly fresh-faced to begin with. And can you confirm that Oswald watched long enough to see them 'go through the underpass' from this: Brennan-"He drew the gun back from the window as though he was drawing it back to his side and maybe paused for another second as though to assure himself that he hit his mark, and then he disappeared.”

"And can you confirm that Oswald watched long enough to see them 'go through the underpass'

Yes, I can:

Even as I hit the ground, my first instinct was to look back up to that man on the sixth floor. “Was he going to fire again?” I wondered. By now the motorcade was beginning to speed up and in only a couple of seconds the President’s car had disappeared under the triple underpass. To my amazement the man still stood there in the window! He didn’t appear to be rushed. There was no particular emotion visible on his face except for a slight smirk. It was a look of satisfaction, as if he had accomplished what he had set out to do. He seemed pleased that no one had realized where the shots were coming from. Then he did something that puzzled me. Very slowly and deliberately he set the rifle on its butt and just stayed there for a moment to savor what he had done, like a hunter who has “bagged his buck.” Then, with no sense of haste, he simply moved slowly away from the window until he disappeared from my line of vision.

Eyewitness to History, by Howard L. Brennan, with J. Edward Cherryholmes

The three men on the 5th floor don't hear anyone rushing about inches above their heads.
_Were they actually listening for somebody 'rushing'? (Btw, how high were those ceilings?) The 3 Amigos seemed more interested in getting over to the west window.

Were they listening for the bolt action of the rifle or the shells hitting the floor? No, but these things were still heard. As Brennan points out, the shooter was in no rush, just standing there, admiring his handiwork. That's why they didn't hear the gunman rushing away -because he didn't rush away. The three men stayed where they were long enough to hear anyone who might be rushing away but they didn't hear anything.
Conversely, the men running across to the west end of the building was heard by an office worker on the fourth floor.
Go figure.

The perfectly positioned Garner doesn't see Oswald supposedly rushing down the stairs.
_Then Oswald fooled her. And was she actually listening or watching for somebody coming down the stairs? Did she know enough about what was going on to expect an appearance by a shooter?

Was she actually listening for Adams and Styles running down the stairs? No, but she still heard them.
Was she watching for Truly and Baker coming up the stairs? No, but she still saw them.
So she was in a position to see and hear all this activity on the stairs but no sign of Oswald or anyone coming down the stairs in between Adams/Styles going down and Baker/Truly coming up. Demonstrating Oswald never rushed down the stairs for his rendezvous with Baker in the second floor lunchroom.

Oswald places himself in the Domino Room at the time of the shooting which is confirmed by his observation of Jarman and Norman entering the TSBD and making their way round to the west elevator.
_Oswald said a lot of things

So did Jarman and Norman, confirming the only time and place he could have seen them was on the first floor minutes before the shooting. Demonstrating Oswald was not the shooter.

Rowland spots the man with the rifle at the west end of the 6th floor when he's supposed to be hiding in the SN.
_Seems Oswald took a last check of shooting-position choice

Really?
Isn't Oswald supposed to be hiding in the SN at this time while BRW has his lunch?
Oh, that's right - BRW was having his lunch in the SN at this time. How inconvenient.

But he can't be in the SN because Rowland spots a black male in the SN window at a time when BRW is having his lunch on the 6th floor, the remains of which are found on top of the SN (eight officers confirming the lunch remains were found at the SN).
_Rowland said a lot of things

He did indeed.

This black male disappears a few minutes before the motorcade arrives mirroring BRW's known movements.
_'Dun-dun-dun' (cue dramatic music)

Just sayin'.
It fits with the known facts.

Got a graphic for that Bill?
_Got a word-salad for that, Dan?

Who? Me?

billchapman


Let there be light


billchapman

The idea that seeing things in sunlight bleaches out the colour of everything is patently ridiculous.
Sunlight highlights colours.
Of course a colour becomes darker in the shadows, but to imagine it then becomes almost white in the sunlight is misguided, to say the least.
Try it next time you're out and about. See how daylight emphasises colour.

[Bill Brown]

Actually, yes. Listen to what he says before the patsy line. He's clearly referring to his stint in the USSR.

That's exactly right, Sean.

You have to look at the patsy statement in it's entirety.

"They have taken me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy." -- Lee Oswald

Oswald is clearly claiming that the Dallas Police Department is picking on him because he once tried to defect to Russia. He is not saying anything about mythical conspirators who are attempting to frame him for the assassination.

[Bill Chapman]

Cool 

It would be better for you if the shooter were wearing clothes that Oswald actually owned, but he wasn't, demonstrating Oswald was not the man on the 6th floor.

Come on, Bill:
"I seen a bald spot on this man's head, trying to look out the window. He had a bald spot on his head. I was looking at the bald spot. I could see his hand, you know the rifle laying across in his hand. And I could see his hand sticking out on the trigger part. And after he got through, he just pulled it back in the window."

Euins sees a bald spot on top of the shooter's head. Demonstrating it wasn't Oswald

"And can you confirm that Oswald watched long enough to see them 'go through the underpass'

Yes, I can:

Even as I hit the ground, my first instinct was to look back up to that man on the sixth floor. “Was he going to fire again?” I wondered. By now the motorcade was beginning to speed up and in only a couple of seconds the President’s car had disappeared under the triple underpass. To my amazement the man still stood there in the window! He didn’t appear to be rushed. There was no particular emotion visible on his face except for a slight smirk. It was a look of satisfaction, as if he had accomplished what he had set out to do. He seemed pleased that no one had realized where the shots were coming from. Then he did something that puzzled me. Very slowly and deliberately he set the rifle on its butt and just stayed there for a moment to savor what he had done, like a hunter who has “bagged his buck.” Then, with no sense of haste, he simply moved slowly away from the window until he disappeared from my line of vision.

Eyewitness to History, by Howard L. Brennan, with J. Edward Cherryholmes
Were they listening for the bolt action of the rifle or the shells hitting the floor? No, but these things were still heard. As Brennan points out, the shooter was in no rush, just standing there, admiring his handiwork. That's why they didn't hear the gunman rushing away -because he didn't rush away. The three men stayed where they were long enough to hear anyone who might be rushing away but they didn't hear anything.
Conversely, the men running across to the west end of the building was heard by an office worker on the fourth floor.
Go figure.

Was she actually listening for Adams and Styles running down the stairs? No, but she still heard them.
Was she watching for Truly and Baker coming up the stairs? No, but she still saw them.
So she was in a position to see and hear all this activity on the stairs but no sign of Oswald or anyone coming down the stairs in between Adams/Styles going down and Baker/Truly coming up. Demonstrating Oswald never rushed down the stairs for his rendezvous with Baker in the second floor lunchroom.

So did Jarman and Norman, confirming the only time and place he could have seen them was on the first floor minutes before the shooting. Demonstrating Oswald was not the shooter.

Really?
Isn't Oswald supposed to be hiding in the SN at this time while BRW has his lunch?
Oh, that's right - BRW was having his lunch in the SN at this time. How inconvenient.

He did indeed.

Just sayin'.
It fits with the known facts.

Who? Me?

The idea that seeing things in sunlight bleaches out the colour of everything is patently ridiculous.
Sunlight highlights colours.
Of course a colour becomes darker in the shadows, but to imagine it then becomes almost white in the sunlight is misguided, to say the least.
Try it next time you're out and about. See how daylight emphasises colour.

My image of Oswald at the window shows rich colour and could also pass for 'light clothing' especially as contrasted against the darker interior

Cherryholmes wrote a lot of things. Especially in his book written years after Brennans death (Thus no Brennan around to proofread)... a book that practically makes Brennan look like a philosopher-poet, ffs. Re colour people will argue endlessly about, for instance, whether a given colour is blue-green or green-blue. And Oswald's hair was thinning and combed over. I have shown images of his head with flash pictures taken during capture revealing what his noggin might show in harsh, direct sunlight. Face it: His hair was in retreat.


Meantime:


billchapman

Now keep in mind that Euins was corrected by Ball changing Euin's erroneous use of 'bald spot' to 'white spot' because the area I've indicated in 'Spot this' (above) is not technically a bald spot given that it is not completely encircled by hair. Now tell us why Ball would make that distinction if Euins was describing an isolated, actual bald spot on TOP of the head.

[Dan O'meara]

My image of Oswald at the window shows rich colour and could also pass for 'light clothing' especially as contrasted against the darker interior

Cherryholmes wrote a lot of things. Especially in his book written years after Brennans death (Thus no Brennan around to proofread)... a book that practically makes Brennan look like a philosopher-poet, ffs. Re colour people will argue endlessly about, for instance, whether a given colour is blue-green or green-blue. And Oswald's hair was thinning and combed over. I have shown images of his head with flash pictures taken during capture revealing what his noggin might show in harsh, direct sunlight. Face it: His hair was in retreat.


Meantime:


billchapman

Over-exposed pics have no bearing on what we see in real life.
Daylight enhances colour.
The open-necked shirt is described as being so light coloured it's almost white by three of the witnesses. Edwards just describes it as white.
Oswald's brown shirt would be seen as such. In no way could it be described as being almost white.

Brennan's affidavit:

"Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped out of sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry."

Now keep in mind that Euins was corrected by Ball changing Euin's erroneous use of 'bald spot' to 'white spot' because the area I've indicated in 'Spot this' (above) is not technically a bald spot given that it is not completely encircled by hair. Now tell us why Ball would make that distinction if Euins was describing an isolated, actual bald spot on TOP of the head.

Not sure when Ball changed Euin's use of "bald spot".
Specter questioned him for the WC hearings.

"Now tell us why Ball would make that distinction if Euins was describing an isolated, actual bald spot on TOP of the head."

If Ball did make this distinction it would be because he knew Oswald didn't have a bald spot and Euins was unequivocal that the shooter had a bald spot. Nowhere does he mention a receding hairline and I'm pretty sure he could've discerned between the two.
It's cool you don't seem to question the notion of Ball telling a witness what he actually saw, rather than the other way round.

The couple of points you raise against the list of evidence pointing away from Oswald being the shooter have been adequately dealt with.
Does this not give you pause for thought - that all the evidence relating to who was on the 6th floor just before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald?
In the "Patsy" model I'm proposing Oswald supplied the rifle, which was the main piece of evidence that tied him to the crime. That was the purpose of the MC - to incriminate Oswald. But he did not take the shots, as the evidence seems to confirm.