Time for Truth

[Dan O'meara]

You certainly were---------one of quite a few authoritative statements you've made on the Brewer thing that have not held up to scrutiny. You just can't help yourself from wading in before having done your homework, can you?

No, logic dictates that Mr. Brewer's claims aren't all true just by virtue of his having made them.

His story that he thought the man at the shoe store might be the suspect in the officer shooting doesn't hold up. Even if by some miracle there was an extremely early local radio broadcast describing the Tippit suspect, then Mr. Brewer would have seen that the man's clothing did NOT match the description. And the fact that he said never a word to Mrs. Postal about the possible connection of the man to the Tippit suspect (she didn't hear about that shooting until the cops arrived!) speaks volumes.

The fact that the two 'IBM men' who he says were in the shoe store with him at the time were never identified, let alone questioned, is telling. Zero corroboration for Mr. Brewer's claim that the suspicious-acting man was Mr. Oswald in his brown shirt.

His claim that the box office was flush with the other buildings on the street was an outright-----------and rather telling----------misrepresentation.

The idea that he got Mrs. Postal to ring police and tell them about a brown-shirted man, and that this led them to believe that the white-shirted suspect they were on the hunt for was in the Texas Theatre is, well, hard to credit.

As for Mr. Brewer's 'recognition' of Mr. Oswald in the Texas Theatre, the evidence is that Officer McDonald did NOT go straight to Mr. Oswald after Mr. Brewer supposedly pointed him out. It's very possible that word having reached the ears of Mr. Brewer & co. that a man on the main floor kept changing seats and sitting beside patrons at random may have been what had led Mr. Brewer to believe that the man he had seen was now on the main floor. And then Mr. Oswald's reaction to being approached may have led Mr. Brewer to assume this guy must be guilty----of something. Or maybe Mr. Brewer was just confused, and convinced himself this must have been the guy at the shoe store. The fact that Mr. Oswald's face looked familiar may have helped with this confusion.

Like many others, I believe there is strong evidence pointing to the scenario that, subsequent to Mr. Oswald's arrest, a second man was arrested, up in the balcony, who was taken out by the rear exit------------and that he was positively identified on the spot by Mr. Brewer as the white-shirted man he'd seen at the shoe store.

Once Mr. Oswald was identified as a TSBD employee, and once word came down from on high that 'No Conspiracy' was the only acceptable solution to the JFK & Tippit killings, DPD wrote the second arrest out of history. And the fact that Mr. Oswald had bought a ticket and entered the cinema many minutes before Mr. Brewer's shoe store sighting was suppressed also. And Mr. Brewer, who was only too happy to revel in the glory of being The Man Who Led The Cops To Oswald, played along. As, initially at least, did Mrs. Postal and Mr. Burroughs. But they both helped clarify matters later on.

The pathetic lack of follow up with Texas Theatre patron-witnesses speaks very large volumes here: things almost certainly did NOT go down as the official version of events would have us believe.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the scenario you've outlined above seems to depend on a truly staggering coincidence.
Oswald is innocently sitting in the cinema minding his own business. Around the same time, at the TSBD building, Roy Truly is reporting to Fritz that one of his employees can't be found. Oswald is suddenly a person of interest as far as Fritz is concerned.
Brewer follows a man in a white shirt to the Texas Theater and, along with Postal, causes the posse of officers hellbent on catching the murderer of Tippit to descend on the cinema. For some inexplicable reason, Oswald decides to attack McDonald, leading to his arrest. When they get him back to the DPD Fritz enters ordering officers to track this man Oswald down only to be told, by some gargantuan coincidence, that Oswald is already in custody. It is then decided to frame Oswald for both the murder of Tippit and the assassination of JFK.

Is that what you're proposing?

[Alan Ford]

From Mrs. Julia Postal's 12/4 affidavit:



"Johnny said he just wasn't in there". Not: 'I can't find him because it's too dark in there with the house lights off'. But: 'He's just not in there'.

In his affidavit a couple of days later, Mr. Brewer completely skips over this failure to find the man inside the cinema that led him to the conclusion that man just wasn't in there:



I spoke with Julia.... I spoke with Butch... We checked the exits... I got Julia to call the police.

The unsuccessful search for the man Mr. Brewer saw at the shoe shop has been deleted.

But on 2 March he is a little more forthcoming:



Nicely ambiguous in its implication: my failure to see him may have been due to the darkness--------it didn't necessarily mean he just wasn't in there

Now the DPD radio dispatch that went out said that "the suspect" was "Supposed to be hiding in the balcony". Not: 'in the balcony'. Not: 'hiding in the Texas Theatre'. But: 'hiding in the balcony'.

So what happened?

It would seem that Mr. Brewer had concluded that the reason he had been unable to find the white-shirted man was that he was hiding rather than sitting like a normal patron. He had heard the noise of a seat popping up in the balcony, but when he looked there was no one there.

This was Mr. Brewer's belief when he told Mrs. Postal to call the police, and she passed it on: suspect is hiding in the balcony. Thinking that the man might be armed and dangerous, Mr. Brewer was not about to go hunting for him down under the seats himself. Best leave that job to the police.

By the time the cops arrived, however, word had reached Mr. Brewer & co. that a man on the main floor had been moving from seat to seat. Mr. Brewer concluded that the man who had been hiding up in the balcony had come downstairs and was not on the main floor.

Which was Mr. Brewer's understanding at the moment the police came in the back door.

[Alan Ford]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the scenario you've outlined above seems to depend on a truly staggering coincidence.
Oswald is innocently sitting in the cinema minding his own business.

Is that what you're proposing?

Not even close 

[Dan O'meara]

Not even close 

Okay, so Oswald is in the Texas Theater trying to locate some kind of contact?

[Alan Ford]

By the time the cops arrived, however, word had reached Mr. Brewer & co. that a man on the main floor had been moving from seat to seat. Mr. Brewer concluded that the man who had been hiding up in the balcony had come downstairs and was not on the main floor.

Combining this with what I wrote a couple of posts back--------------

"As for Mr. Brewer's 'recognition' of Mr. Oswald in the Texas Theatre, the evidence is that Officer McDonald did NOT go straight to Mr. Oswald after Mr. Brewer supposedly pointed him out. It's very possible that word having reached the ears of Mr. Brewer & co. that a man on the main floor kept changing seats and sitting beside patrons at random may have been what had led Mr. Brewer to believe that the man he had seen was now on the main floor. And then Mr. Oswald's reaction to being approached may have led Mr. Brewer to assume this guy must be guilty----of something."

-------------there is a very real possibility that Mr. Brewer, as he looked out from the curtains with the house lights up, did NOT see the white-shirted man he'd seen at the shoe store but DID believe that man was hiding under one of the seats (just as Mr. Brewer believed he'd done up in the balcony). So Mr. Brewer indicated as much to the officer(s).

[Alan Ford]

Okay, so Oswald is in the Texas Theater trying to locate some kind of contact?

Clap clap!

[Dan O'meara]

Combining this with what I wrote a couple of posts back--------------

"As for Mr. Brewer's 'recognition' of Mr. Oswald in the Texas Theatre, the evidence is that Officer McDonald did NOT go straight to Mr. Oswald after Mr. Brewer supposedly pointed him out. It's very possible that word having reached the ears of Mr. Brewer & co. that a man on the main floor kept changing seats and sitting beside patrons at random may have been what had led Mr. Brewer to believe that the man he had seen was now on the main floor. And then Mr. Oswald's reaction to being approached may have led Mr. Brewer to assume this guy must be guilty----of something."

-------------there is a very real possibility that Mr. Brewer, as he looked out from the curtains with the house lights up, did NOT see the white-shirted man he'd seen at the shoe store but DID believe that man was hiding under one of the seats (just as Mr. Brewer believed he'd done up in the balcony). So Mr. Brewer indicated as much to the officer(s).

You do realise that this is just stuff you're making up.
"It's very possible" and "there is a very real possibility" are just ways of saying you're making it up.
What evidence do you have that supports any of this? Speculations and assumptions based on some kind of evidence are fine but this is just stuff you're making up.

[Dan O'meara]

Clap clap!

So, how does this alter the staggering coincidence that Brewer and Postal just happened to lead the police to Oswald's location?