Impossible

[Alan J. Ford]

Two of the Warren Omission's key witnesses describe the actual gunman in both Dealey Plaza and at the intersection of 10th & Patton as MUCH heavier than the wrongly-accused.

Mr. Brennan (Howard) described the Dealey Plaza assassin as a white man in his early 30's, about 5 feet 10 inches tall, weighing from 160 to 170 pounds and dressed in light‐colored clothes. In contrast, the wrongly-accused was MUCH younger, wore a brown shirt and was nowhere near 160 pounds let alone 170lbs) Strike one!

Quite interesting that Mr. Euins (Amos Lee, 16,) spotted a key detail, a rather telling one actually, that Mr. Brennan seemed to miss. Mr. Euins shared that the actual gunman firing upon the motorcade, quote, “he had a bald spot on his head.” The wrongly-accused did not have a bald spot. Strike Two!!

Mrs. Markham (Helen) described the gunman over at the 10th & Patton scene as short, heavy, stocky and w/bushy hair. The wrongly-accused's hair was anything but bushy. The wrongly-accused's physique was anything but stocky or heavy. Strike Three!!!

The wrongly-accused weighed merely 131lbs on November 22, 1963. It's impossible for him to have lost 35lbs in a short span of time between 12:30PM to the time of his initial line-up later that evening. Like all the other "evidence" in this contrived case to frame an innocent party, the "evidence' is manufactured amid a hastily contrived script mired in the stench of horse manure. It's impossible to lose 35lbs in one day, let alone in a few hours time.

The wrongly-accused did Not shoot anybody. Anybody.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961#relPageId=389

[Walt Cakebread]

Two of the Warren Omission's key witnesses describe the actual gunman in both Dealey Plaza and at the intersection of 10th & Patton as MUCH heavier than the wrongly-accused.

Mr. Brennan (Howard) described the Dealey Plaza assassin as a white man in his early 30's, about 5 feet 10 inches tall, weighing from 160 to 170 pounds and dressed in light‐colored clothes. In contrast, the wrongly-accused was MUCH younger, wore a brown shirt and was nowhere near 160 pounds let alone 170lbs) Strike one!

Quite interesting that Mr. Euins (Amos Lee, 16,) spotted a key detail, a rather telling one actually, that Mr. Brennan seemed to miss. Mr. Euins shared that the actual gunman firing upon the motorcade, quote, “he had a bald spot on his head.” The wrongly-accused did not have a bald spot. Strike Two!!

Mrs. Markham (Helen) described the gunman over at the 10th & Patton scene as short, heavy, stocky and w/bushy hair. The wrongly-accused's hair was anything but bushy. The wrongly-accused's physique was anything but stocky or heavy. Strike Three!!!

The wrongly-accused weighed merely 131lbs on November 22, 1963. It's impossible for him to have lost 35lbs in a short span of time between 12:30PM to the time of his initial line-up later that evening. Like all the other "evidence" in this contrived case to frame an innocent party, the "evidence' is manufactured amid a hastily contrived script mired in the stench of horse manure. It's impossible to lose 35lbs in one day, let alone in a few hours time.

The wrongly-accused did Not shoot anybody. Anybody.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961#relPageId=389

A very nice rebuttal to the official tale Mr Ford!......

[Richard Smith]

In which we are told that because a couple of witnesses were slightly off in describing Oswald's weight/height, all the evidence of Oswald's guilt should be ignored.  Baker encountered Oswald face to face in the lunchroom and estimated his age at 30 years and weight as around 165 pounds.  We know he saw Oswald up close per Truly's confirmation and that was his estimate as a law enforcement person.  That's why it is called an estimate.   Oswald looked older than his 24 years with his receding hairline.   Most people are not circus performers who can guess weight and height with scientific precision.  More weak sauce.  And take a look at pictures of Oswald when they brought him into the DPD.  He looked like a man with "bushy hair".   If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person they saw was LHO.

[Martin Weidmann]

In which we are told that because a couple of witnesses were slightly off in describing Oswald's weight/height, all the evidence of Oswald's guilt should be ignored.  Baker encountered Oswald face to face in the lunchroom and estimated his age at 30 years and weight as around 165 pounds.  We know he saw Oswald up close per Truly's confirmation and that was his estimate as a law enforcement person.  That's why it is called an estimate.   Oswald looked older than his 24 years with his receding hairline.   Most people are not circus performers who can guess weight and height with scientific precision.  More weak sauce.  And take a look at pictures of Oswald when they brought him into the DPD.  He looked like a man with "bushy hair".   If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person they saw was LHO.

Translation; a witness like Brennan and Markham can be wrong, unless of course they say something that fits with the official narrative.

to wit;

If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person they saw was LHO.

Gotta love the hypocrisy   

[John Iacoletti]

In which we are told that because a couple of witnesses were slightly off in describing Oswald's weight/height, all the evidence of Oswald's guilt should be ignored.

"Slightly off".  LOL.
"all the evidence of Oswald's guilt".  LOL.

Baker encountered Oswald face to face in the lunchroom and estimated his age at 30 years and weight as around 165 pounds.

Baker said he encountered a man walking away from the staircase on the third or fourth floor who he estimated to be 30 years old, 5' 9", and 165 pounds, dark hair, and wearing a light brown jacket.

And take a look at pictures of Oswald when they brought him into the DPD.  He looked like a man with "bushy hair".   If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person they saw was LHO.

"Confirmed".  LOL.  Markham (allegedly) chose him out of an unfair and biased lineup.

[Richard Smith]

If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person that they saw was LHO.  Oswald certainly looked older than his 24 years with his receding hairline.  More weak sauce.

[Mike Orr]

Alan J. Ford , your comments are spot on ! It's so obvious that Oswald was just what he said he was , which was a " Patsy " . Oswald did not shoot anyone that day . The evidence against Oswald was weak . LBJ's close relationship with  J. Edgar Hoover was so telling that not only did he say that they had their man " Oswald " but that there was no one else involved . The evidence tells us that there were more than 3 shots fired at JFK . One shot never even hit the Limo . One shot went through the windshield . One shot hit the chrome molding above the rearview mirror . JFK was hit from the front 3 times , once in the throat , twice in the head and shot  once in the back . John Connally was hit in the back at least once because the magic bullet that supposedly went through JFK's base of the neck and out the front of his neck and then into the back of John Connally and coming out of the front of his chest and into and through the wrist and finally into his thigh . That so called " Magic Bullet " was never removed from his thigh , so how did they show us an almost pristine bullet that did all that damage when the bullet was still in John Connally's leg !!!!  The same object can't be in two places at the same time !!!! That magic ( almost pristine bullet ) broke Ribs and broke a wrist and then entered the thigh where it stayed because the Dr.s never removed the Bullet from JC's thigh .

[Jerry Freeman]

And take a look at pictures of Oswald when they brought him into the DPD.  He looked like a man with "bushy hair".   If there were any doubt, these witnesses later confirmed the person they saw was LHO.

He looked like a man with "bushy hair".
Yeah after the cops beat the crap out of him.
 The usual Oswald with neat hair------