A Rock Solid Alibi.....

[Alan Ford]

Holding for Huck?   

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan. In fact, you are quite at a loss.

That's okay, Mr Collins. We're understanding people. And we take heart from the fact that you have been disabused of the dreadful misapprehension you have been laboring under that these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio related to Mr Charles Givens. This means that you can now decontaminate your brain of the WC propaganda you were fed about this issue and actually approach it for the very first time with some logical thinking.

If you go bravely forth into this exciting new world of evidence-based research, you have every hope of coming to the realization that your claim that the witness behind the suspect description was Mr Brennan is perfectly absurd. This will be a painful realization for you, but it promises to be a crucial first step out of the judgment-addling fog of Warren Gullibility into which you so sadly wandered a long time ago. No pain, no gain, right?

 

[Charles Collins]

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan. In fact, you are quite at a loss.

That's okay, Mr Collins. We're understanding people. And we take heart from the fact that you have been disabused of the dreadful misapprehension you have been laboring under that these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio related to Mr Charles Givens. This means that you can now decontaminate your brain of the WC propaganda you were fed about this issue and actually approach it for the very first time with some logical thinking.

If you go bravely forth into this exciting new world of evidence-based research, you have every hope of coming to the realization that your claim that the witness behind the suspect description was Mr Brennan is perfectly absurd. This will be a painful realization for you, but it promises to be a crucial first step out of the judgment-addling fog of Warren Gullibility into which you so sadly wandered a long time ago. No pain, no gain, right?

 

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan.


Let me get this straight.

You are trying to ask me to provide evidence that Brennan was the person who gave the description to Sawyer? If so, I must have missed the question.

And your argument is that it was someone else other than Brennan?

And your evidence is that Sawyer said: “From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.“?   

Do I have this straight?

[Alan Ford]

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan.


Let me get this straight.

You are trying to ask me to provide evidence that Brennan was the person who gave the description to Sawyer? If so, I must have missed the question.

And your argument is that it was someone else other than Brennan?

And your evidence is that Sawyer said: “From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.“?   

Do I have this straight?

~Grin~

You had it straight several posts back, Mr Collins. What you clearly don't have is the ability to offer a coherent response.

Do let us know when you can logically connect what Insp. Sawyer says over the police radio with your claim that the suspect description he has put out was given to him by Mr Brennan-------------a witness who saw a man, whose clothing he noticed, firing from an upper window of the building

 

[Charles Collins]

~Grin~

You had it straight several posts back, Mr Collins. What you clearly don't have is the ability to offer a coherent response.

Do let us know when you can logically connect what Insp. Sawyer says over the police radio with your claim that the suspect description he has put out was given to him by Mr Brennan-------------a witness who saw a man, whose clothing he noticed, firing from an upper window of the building

 

Read the testimonies of Eugene Barnett and Forrest Sorrels.

[Bill Chapman]

“Reasonably close”? It was the wrong height, wrong weight, wrong age, and wrong clothing to be Oswald. He also had no reasonable way to estimate those things for a person “taking aim” for the last shot, who would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.

Wrong height
_Getting anal about an inch of two, I see

would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.
_IOW, took a knee..

BTW, Brennan saw him from the belt up
Thick neck adds to determination of weight
Bulky open shirt adds to appearance of body size
Harsh light & shadows, smirk, squint, nerves, worry (no tea for two) add age

TAEers don't realize that harsh direct sunshine lightens clothing


billchapman

--------
BONUS
--------
Too bad Oswald got reasonably close to Tippit

[Martin Weidmann]

Wrong height
_Getting anal about an inch of two, I see

would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.
_IOW, took a knee..

BTW, Brennan saw him from the belt up
Thick neck adds to determination of weight
Bulky open shirt adds to appearance of body size
Harsh light & shadows, smirk, squint, nerves, worry (no tea for two) add age

TAEers don't realize that harsh direct sunshine lightens clothing


billchapman

--------
BONUS
--------
Too bad Oswald got reasonably close to Tippit

And so we get from a completely incorrect description to a "correct" one in four easy steps.....

It's called making up your own "reality"

[John Iacoletti]

It was reasonably close given the circumstances. And he saw him while waiting for the motorcade to arrive from the waist up.

Except it was the guy with the rifle “taking aim” that Brennan claimed to see “from the belt up”. And how did he know that the guy crouched down with a rifle was the same person he saw earlier with no rifle?

[Charles Collins]

Except it was the guy with the rifle “taking aim” that Brennan claimed to see “from the belt up”. And how did he know that the guy crouched down with a rifle was the same person he saw earlier with no rifle?

I would assume that he still had the same face on. Also, he said he saw him draw the rifle back to his side while looking towards the limo. Then move away from the window.