~Yawn~
1. Giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight is not providing us with 'evidence'. It's just giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight
2. Mr Alyea played along with the lie in Dec 1963 but later decided to tell the true story--------which he did quite emphatically. The DPD men, true to form, just kept up the lie
Yeah, great stuff Alan.
So, Jarman's lying, Mooney's lying, Hill's lying, Haygood's lying, Brewer's lying, Weatherford's lying, McCurley's lying, Craig's lying and Alyea
was lying but changed his mind.
Typical of a lot of your research.
Do you remember how many people you claimed were lying when you thought Oswald was PM.
Oh yeah, if you knew anything about the case you'd know that these weren't all "DPD men".
I've provided a wealth of evidence supporting my position, you were asked to provided one scrap of evidence supporting yours. True to form, you fail to do even that.
3.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. ROWLAND - It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.
Mr. SPECTER - At or about that time did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; no one else on that floor.
Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.
-------------->But nice try, Mr O'Meara!
Another English lesson, Alan?
Really?
The key phrase is "at or about that time" - a reference to 12:15pm. mentioned earlier in Rowland's testimony.
This phrase is part of a question - did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Specter is asking a specific question - did you see anyone else [other than the man with the rifle and the man at the SN window], at any window on the 6th floor?
Rowland gives a very specific answer - no, I did not see anyone else on the 6th floor.
So, at or about 12:15pm, Rowland did not see anyone else on the 6th floor other than those two men.
The questioning then moves on. Rowland is reminded that he's already testified about people on the 5th floor and is asked to elaborate on that,
which he does.
This is a completely separate question from the one about the 6th floor. Rowland is not asked "who did you see on the 5th floor at or about 12:15pm?"
You have taken this phrase from one question and decided to stick in another question to suit your purposes.
That's how desperate you are to make it appear like you have any kind of point.
I thought you were being deceitful but I now think it's just a lack of language skills.
All you can do is say everyone is lying who doesn't support your MADS theory.
You twist the meaning of testimonial evidence to suit your ends and never provided a scrap of evidence to support your fantasy - isn't this ringing a bell?