Brown/Weidmann, Mini-Debate?

[Martin Weidmann]

The pedantic analysis of the timeline is a desperate effort by CTers to exonerate Oswald.  Because of the vagaries of the estimates of time  of events down to the very minute, it allows CTers to endlessly go down the yellow brick road with their contrarian approach as though they are proving something.  The fact remains that there is no doubt that Oswald murdered J.D. Tippit even if there are real or imagined ambiguities in the timeline. That analysis is completely moot if it can otherwise be proven that Oswald was at the crime scene.  This crime was committed in broad daylight in front of many witnesses.  Those witnesses confirm that LHO was the person at the scene with a gun.  He was arrested a short distance away with a gun after acting so suspiciously that random citizens called the police.  He didn't even wait to ask the police what was going on but attempted to assault them when approached.  He had in his possession the exact same TWO brands of ammunition as used in the Tippit murder.  So there are multiple circumstances that link Oswald to this crime beyond any doubt.  The timeline doesn't change that one iota.  If you want to believe Oswald ran, got a ride, or flew there by helicopter, it doesn't change the evidence that places him at the crime scene at the moment Tippit was murdered.

A pathetic LN rant about Oswald's percieved guilt, when all we are discussing is when Callaway helped to load Tippit in to the ambulance. Nice... totally irrelevant but amusing nevertheless.

That darned time line must have got you really worried   
.

[John Iacoletti]

That "602" was Butler attempting to let dispatch know that they were leaving the scene en route to the hospital.

Still waiting for any substantiation of this claim.

[John Iacoletti]

The fact remains that there is no doubt that Oswald murdered J.D. Tippit even if there are real or imagined ambiguities in the timeline.

There’s nothing “factual” about that. It’s merely your subjective, faith-based opinion.

[Bill Brown]

I have stayed off of this thread for a month, to allow Martin Weidmann and Bill Brown to debate it. That is long enough.

I think Bill Brown is clearly correct. The notion that Callaway first helped load the body of Officer Tippit into the ambulance and then called in on the radio is supported by the physical evidence, the police tapes. The opposite notion is only supported by a witness recollection, Callaway’s and witness memories is always among the weakest kind of evidence. And in this case, it is evidence that is contradicted by other witness’s memories. And, above all else, by the physical evidence. I always choose physical evidence over the memory of witnesses. Can’t be much of a skeptic if one does otherwise.

One of the most common types of witness’s errors, is misremembering the order of events. It is less likely, but not impossible, to remember doing something one did not do at all. Like for Callaway to remember that he helped load a body onto an ambulance, or talking on the police radio, or going in search of the killer, but to have actually not done some or any of those things. But is would be very easy for him to misremember to order of events. I am confident that he did misremember the order of events. The evidence shows this.

Good to know someone gets it.

[Martin Weidmann]

Good to know someone gets it.

Someone gets what? That you have concocted your own little false narrative based on incorrect interpretations whilst at the same time dismissing and ignoring conclusive evidence that shows you to be wrong? I don't think there is anybody who doesn't get that.

What you have demonstrated is that it is just about impossible to have a reasonable debate with you because all you do is hold speeches in which the same incorrect information is repeated over and over again. That, by itself, is bad enough, but the truly sad part is that you can't even support your main and crucial claim with evidence.

[Richard Smith]

A pathetic LN rant about Oswald's percieved guilt, when all we are discussing is when Callaway helped to load Tippit in to the ambulance. Nice... totally irrelevant but amusing nevertheless.

That darned time line must have got you really worried   
.

Oswald's presence at the crime scene is "totally irrelevant"! HA HA HA.  What better example could there be of contrarian "logic"?  I realize that you prefer to direct your contrarian "talents" to pedantic tangential issues while ignoring the elephant in the room.  However, multiple witnesses place Oswald at the scene.  If Oswald is at the scene when Tippit is murdered that means he had time to get there, and all your tortured analysis of the timeline is meaningless.  The evidence demonstrates beyond any doubt that LHO was present at the scene with a gun at the moment Tippit was murdered.  Whether there can ever be certainty on the exact nanosecond that this occurred is the stuff of contrarian deflection to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion based on the totality of evidence.

[Martin Weidmann]

Oswald's presence at the crime scene is "totally irrelevant"! HA HA HA.  What better example could there be of contrarian "logic"?  I realize that you prefer to direct your contrarian "talents" to pedantic tangential issues while ignoring the elephant in the room.  However, multiple witnesses place Oswald at the scene.  If Oswald is at the scene when Tippit is murdered that means he had time to get there, and all your tortured analysis of the timeline is meaningless.  The evidence demonstrates beyond any doubt that LHO was present at the scene with a gun at the moment Tippit was murdered.  Whether there can ever be certainty on the exact nanosecond that this occurred is the stuff of contrarian deflection to avoid accepting the obvious conclusion based on the totality of evidence.

Oswald's presence at the crime scene is "totally irrelevant"! HA HA HA.

Are you laughing about your own stupidity? Oswald's alleged presence at the crime scene is indeed totally irrelevant for the topic Bill and I were discussing.

However, multiple witnesses place Oswald at the scene.  If Oswald is at the scene when Tippit is murdered that means he had time to get there, and all your tortured analysis of the timeline is meaningless.

Flawed circular logic, based on the dubious assumption that witness identification in a bogus line up has any significant evidentiary value.
The other side of the argument is that if the time line shows that Oswald couldn't have been there when the shooting happened, the witnesses must be wrong.

[Richard Smith]

Oswald's presence at the crime scene is "totally irrelevant"! HA HA HA.

Are you laughing about your own stupidity? Oswald's alleged presence at the crime scene is indeed totally irrelevant for the topic Bill and I were discussing.

However, multiple witnesses place Oswald at the scene.  If Oswald is at the scene when Tippit is murdered that means he had time to get there, and all your tortured analysis of the timeline is meaningless.

Flawed circular logic, based on the dubious assumption that witness identification in a bogus line up has any significant evidentiary value.
The other side of the argument is that if the time line shows that Oswald couldn't have been there when the shooting happened, the witnesses must be wrong.

Once a thing occurs, the odds against it occurring are no longer relevant.  It's like telling someone holding a winning lottery ticket that the odds against them winning are so long that it is impossible they won.  Lunatic logic.  You are trapped down the rabbit hole taking the events individually to avoid the larger totality of evidence.  Your timeline nonsense is pointless if the evidence otherwise confirms Oswald was there at the moment Tippit was murdered.  This event occurred in broad daylight in front of numerous witnesses.  Oswald was identified by multiple witnesses as the person at the scene.  He is arrested a short distance away with a gun AND the same two brands of ammo as used by the killer.   If Oswald is the murderer of Tippit, then we know with no ambiguity that he was there even if we can't know with absolute certainty the exact minute of his every movement.