Poll claims Oswald seen as ......

[Martin Weidmann]

I've answered your question multiple times.  Here it is again.  The evidence of Oswald's presence on the 6th floor has been known and widely available from many sources for six decades.  We have discussed it many times.  You already know that evidence.  You don't accept it.  There is no reason to go down that rabbit hole over and over again to provide to deflect the issue to your bizarre contrarian responses on that topic.   You have reached a conclusion that Oswald didn't come down the stairs after the assassination but refuse to confirm that you accept the implications of YOUR own conclusion.

Here is the simple question for you once again.  Do you believe Oswald is innocent based on your conclusion that he didn't come down the stairs from the 6th floor or not?  How does Oswald commit the assassination from the 6th floor if he couldn't have been there according to you because the ONLY way to get to the 2nd floor from the 6th floor in the known timeframe is down those stairs?  The ones you concluded he didn't come down.  Why such a mighty struggle against YOUR own conclusion?  Why not just say that it is your conclusion that Oswald did not assassinate JFK because you have concluded that he didn't come down the stairs?  Why is that so hard?  It's YOUR conclusion.

I've answered your question multiple times.  Here it is again.  The evidence of Oswald's presence on the 6th floor has been known and widely available from many sources for six decades.  We have discussed it many times.  You already know that evidence.  You don't accept it.  There is no reason to go down that rabbit hole over and over again to provide to deflect the issue to your bizarre contrarian responses on that topic. 

That's not an answer to my question. It's an evasion of answering my question. I am asking you what evidence (not assumption) proves that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he went down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot. You have not provided that evidence and have instead, by way of a total cop out, stated that the evidence is widely known and available, which is an outright lie as, to my knowledge, no such evidence exists. Don't confuse assumptions with actual evidence!

Why are you having such difficulty answering my question? You claim that there is evidence that proves that Oswald was on 6th floor when the shots were fired, so why not simply produce it.

The only reason for not producing it is, imo, that there either is no such evidence or that you understand that whatever evidence you believe there is doesn't really prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired after all. Which of the two it is, doesn't really matter. As long as you don't produce the evidence your claims lack all credibility! It is in fact an admission that there is no credible evidence that proves Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired.


Do you believe Oswald is innocent based on your conclusion that he didn't come down the stairs from the 6th floor or not?

Just answered, yet again, in my previous post. It's not my problem that you can't read or understand what you read.

How does Oswald commit the assassination from the 6th floor if he couldn't have been there

You seem confused. That's not the same question as the one you have been asking. I am truly amazed that you would ask such a pathetic rhetorical question.

[John Iacoletti]

Such a weak deflection.  Run, Martin, run.  The evidence of Oswald's presence on the 6th floor has been documented in several investigations.

  You are just unable to answer the question.

So once again, do you believe Oswald is innocent because he didn't come down the stairs or not?  You have made this claime and thus far refused to answer this simple question.  A violation of forum rules.

More  what forum rule? If there was such a rule then you’re breaking it by not answering the questions put to you.

[Richard Smith]

I've answered your question multiple times.  Here it is again.  The evidence of Oswald's presence on the 6th floor has been known and widely available from many sources for six decades.  We have discussed it many times.  You already know that evidence.  You don't accept it.  There is no reason to go down that rabbit hole over and over again to provide to deflect the issue to your bizarre contrarian responses on that topic. 

That's not an answer to my question. It's an evasion of answering my question. I am asking you what evidence (not assumption) proves that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he went down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot. You have not provided that evidence and have instead, by way of a total cop out, stated that the evidence is widely known and available, which is an outright lie as, to my knowledge, no such evidence exists. Don't confuse assumptions with actual evidence!

Why are you having such difficulty answering my question? You claim that there is evidence that proves that Oswald was on 6th floor when the shots were fired, so why not simply produce it.

The only reason for not producing it is, imo, that there either is no such evidence or that you understand that whatever evidence you believe there is doesn't really prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired after all. Which of the two it is, doesn't really matter. As long as you don't produce the evidence your claims lack all credibility! It is in fact an admission that there is no credible evidence that proves Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired.


Do you believe Oswald is innocent based on your conclusion that he didn't come down the stairs from the 6th floor or not?

Just answered, yet again, in my previous post. It's not my problem that you can't read or understand what you read.

How does Oswald commit the assassination from the 6th floor if he couldn't have been there

You seem confused. That's not the same question as the one you have been asking. I am truly amazed that you would ask such a pathetic rhetorical question.

Unreal.  An endless loop.  To summarize, Martin concluded that Oswald didn't come down the stairs after the assassination based upon his analysis of witness testimony.  He stated this as a fact (i.e. Oswald didn't come down the stairs).  Those stairs are the only possible means for Oswald to have made it from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor lunchroom in time to encounter Baker after the assassination.  Martin, however, will not confirm that he accepts the ONLY possible implication of his own conclusion that Oswald didn't come down the stairs (i.e. Oswald couldn't be the assassin).  Instead he tries to deflect this back to the "evidence" that Oswald was on the 6th floor.  Something that has been documented for six decades.  Evidence that he is aware of and that there is nothing to add by myself or anyone else.   Why he refuses to embrace the only possible implication of his own conclusion is an insight into the bizarre mindset of the contrarian.  Their entire purpose is to cast doubt on Oswald's guilt.  They do this without any consideration of the implications of their own nutty theories having any validity.  It is very amusing.

[Martin Weidmann]

Unreal.  An endless loop.  To summarize, Martin concluded that Oswald didn't come down the stairs after the assassination based upon his analysis of witness testimony.  He stated this as a fact (i.e. Oswald didn't come down the stairs).  Those stairs are the only possible means for Oswald to have made it from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor lunchroom in time to encounter Baker after the assassination.  Martin, however, will not confirm that he accepts the ONLY possible implication of his own conclusion that Oswald didn't come down the stairs (i.e. Oswald couldn't be the assassin).  Instead he tries to deflect this back to the "evidence" that Oswald was on the 6th floor.  Something that has been documented for six decades.  Evidence that he is aware of and that there is nothing to add by myself or anyone else.   Why he refuses to embrace the only possible implication of his own conclusion is an insight into the bizarre mindset of the contrarian.  Their entire purpose is to cast doubt on Oswald's guilt.  They do this without any consideration of the implications of their own nutty theories having any validity.  It is very amusing.

And Richard continues to embarras himself with every post he writes. Still desperately trying to divert the discussion away from having to provide the answer to the questions I have been asking for months.

Why is it that Richard is trying so desperately to stay away from providing this so-called evidence "that has been documented for six decades"? The most likely scenario is that he understands that no such evidence actually exists and has ever existed and that he is confusing actual real evidence with the misrepresentations, assumptions and unsupported claims and conclusions presented to us in Chapter 4 of the WC Report.

Richard probably also understands that even if the rifle found at the TSBD is the same one as Klein's allegedly shipped to Oswald's P.O. box and even if that rifle was fired that day (which was never established), it still does not even begin to prove that Oswald himself was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired. To conclude that he was would be nothing more than a superficial assumption!

That's why Richard prefers to embarras himself on a daily basis rather than exposing his own stupidy in believing that fairytale!

No matter how much Richard tries to make this about me, the mere fact that he refuses to back up his claims with the evidence I have asked for is the best evidence of the fact that this elusive evidence simply doesn't exist. If it did exist, and showed what Richard claims it does, he has no reason to do his month long song and dance act.

[Richard Smith]

And Richard continues to embarras himself with every post he writes. Still desperately trying to divert the discussion away from having to provide the answer to the questions I have been asking for months.

Why is it that Richard is trying so desperately to stay away from providing this so-called evidence "that has been documented for six decades". The most likely scenario is that Richard understands that no such evidence actually exists or has ever existed and that he is confusing actual real evidence with the misrepresentations, assumptions and unsupported claims and conclusions presented to us in Chapter 4 of the WC Report.

Richard probably understands that even if the rifle found at the TSBD is the same one as Klein's allegedly shipped to Oswald's P.O. box and even if that rifle was fired that day (which was never established) than it still does not even begin to prove that Oswald himself was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired. To conclude that he was would be a superficial assumption!

That's why Richard prefers to embarras himself on a daily basis rather than exposing his own stupidy in believing that fairytale!

No matter how much Richard tries to make this about me, the mere fact that he refuses to back up his claims with the evidence I have asked for is the best evidence of the fact that this elusive evidence simply doesn't exist. If it did exist, and showed what Richard claims it does, he has no reason to do his month long song and dance act.

So many words and endless personal commentary, but again no answer to the simple question about YOUR conclusion that Oswald "didn't come down the stairs."  We have reached an impasse. 

[Martin Weidmann]

So many words and endless personal commentary, but again no answer to the simple question about YOUR conclusion that Oswald "didn't come down the stairs."  We have reached an impasse.

We have reached an impasse.

No we haven't. What we are dealing with here is your complete failure and/or unwillingness to provide evidence to support the claims you have made.

As for the simple answer to your question. It has been given a number of times already, but here it is again;

The preponderance of evidence clearly supports the conclusion that Oswald couldn't have come down the stairs, within 75 seconds after the last shot, and not be noticed. That's my opinion and it's based on the available evidence. You know, the evidence you don't want to discuss!

You just pretend we somehow have reached an impasse, so you can avoid providing the evidence for your claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he managed to go down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot.

Chapter 4 of your bible, the WC Report, deals with the stairs matter simply by ignoring it completely and only makes assumptions not justified by the available evidence about Oswald being on the 6th floor. You, on the other hand, have claimed that Oswald was in fact on the 6th floor and did come down the stairs unnoticed.

You have now shown us, beyond doubt, that your claim was not only not credible but also based on no evidence whatsoever. The only reasonable conclusion has to be that you simply believe that Oswald was on the 6th floor based not on actual evidence but simply because you want him to be, regardless of the facts.

[Martin Weidmann]

As Richard Smith is still refusing (or perhaps simply unable) to produce any credible evidence for his claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and managed to go down the stairs unnoticed, within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot, I will keep this thread on the first page until either Richard Smith produces the evidence that support his claims or admits that he hasn't got such supporting evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

“Richard” never produces any evidence. But I guarantee you that he will pop up again somewhere else like a whack-a-mole and trot out all the same false and unsubstantiated claims all over again.