You have this tiresome obsession with Brennan. He saw different parts of Oswald over the course of two sightings.
How did he know it was the same person?
Cherry-picking his testimony gets one this:
"But at the time that he was firing the gun, a possibility from his belt up."
That's not a cherry-pick. "At the time that he was firing the gun" is not ambiguous. You're changing it to mean something else because you
want it to mean something else. Nothing more. You're the one who's cherry-picking what you like out of his affidavit and ignoring his testimony which says something different. Besides, he doesn't ever mention in his affidavit seeing the man
stand up, does he? He thought he was standing the entire time.
At best, Brennan made different claims and gave different details every time he talked about what he saw, which makes him unreliable. But you have to go with him because he's all you got.
That is what's tiresome. If he had described an elderly negro, you would be attacking him like the WC did to Arnold Rowland.
The scope is black and against a dark background. And the rifle is at an oblique angle to Brennan.
Please explain. What's the dark background? And how oblique? At the time of the head shot?
