Oswald's Escape Route Time Trial

[Martin Weidmann]

When you can prove to me that your tired, well worn "speculative assumptions" are not evidence then I may consider your ideas but until then, the Mountain of Evidence is impervious to your feeble attempts of refutation. Sorry about that!

JohnM

When you can prove to me that your tired, well worn "speculative assumptions" are not evidence

Huh? You seem to be confused, John. I don't have "tired, well worn "speculative assumptions". You have....

And, why would I have to prove a negative that is utterly self explanatory?

But if you really want to argue that your biased assumptions and speculations are actually evidence, go ahead. You're only exposing yourself as delusional.

[Martin Weidmann]

"It's possible the fibers were planted. It's possible the backyard photos were faked. It's possible the prints were planted. It's possible the money order is fake. It's possible the envelope was faked. It's possible the Tippit eyewitnesses were wrong. It's possible the shells were switched. It's possible the revolver was planted. It's possible..it's possible...it's possible...."

At some point one would think a reasonably intelligent person - a supposed non-conspiracist at that - would take a step back, look at this and ask himself, "Is it really possible to fake all of this?"

Let's just go back for a moment to the immortal words of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes who said; "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

A credible criminal investigation is conducted by eliminating possibilities to arrive at the only possibility that can not be ruled out and thus, no matter how improbable, must be the truth!

It's possible..it's possible...it's possible....

I can play that game...

It's possible that Klein's sent a 40" rifle to fill an order for a 36" rifle. It's possible that Oswald carried a broken down rifle in a paper bag on Friday morning. It's possible that Buell Wesley Frazier was wrong when he denied that the bag shown to him on Friday evening was the one he had seen Oswald carry. It's possible that Oswald was in fact on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 and it's possible that he came down the stairs of the TSBD, within 75 seconds after the last shot, without being seen or heard by anybody. It's possible that Oswald somehow managed to get to 10th/Patton in time to kill Tippit. It's possible that DPD officers found the BY photos during the second search of Ruth Paine's house, on Saturday, and that Michael Paine was wrong when he said an FBI agent had shown him a BY photo on Friday evening. It's possible that Oswald did leave the roominghouse of Friday afternoon, wearing a light-grey jacket and that Marina was wrong when she said he was wearing that jacket when he arrived in Irving on Thursday evening. It is possible that Helen Markham took nine minutes to walk one block and arrive at 10th/Patton at 1:12 / 1:13 and that she was wrong when she said she got on her regular bus on Jefferson at 1:15.

It's possible..it's possible...it's possible....

[John Mytton]

Let's just go back for a moment to the immortal words of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes who said; "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

A credible criminal investigation is conducted by eliminating possibilities to arrive at the only possibility that can not be ruled out and thus, no matter how improbable, must be the truth!

It's possible..it's possible...it's possible....

I can play that game...

It's possible that Klein's sent a 40" rifle to fill an order for a 36" rifle. It's possible that Oswald carried a broken down rifle in a paper bag on Friday morning. It's possible that Buell Wesley Frazier was wrong when he denied that the bag shown to him on Friday evening was the one he had seen Oswald carry. It's possible that Oswald was in fact on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 and it's possible that he came down the stairs of the TSBD, within 75 seconds after the last shot, without being seen or heard by anybody. It's possible that Oswald somehow managed to get to 10th/Patton in time to kill Tippit. It's possible that DPD officers found the BY photos during the second search of Ruth Paine's house, on Saturday, and that Michael Paine was wrong when he said an FBI agent had shown him a BY photo on Friday evening. It's possible that Oswald did leave the roominghouse of Friday afternoon, wearing a light-grey jacket and that Marina was wrong when she said he was wearing that jacket when he arrived in Irving on Thursday evening. It is possible that Helen Markham took nine minutes to walk one block and arrive at 10th/Patton at 1:12 / 1:13 and that she was wrong when she said she got on her regular bus on Jefferson at 1:15.

It's possible..it's possible...it's possible....

So you think discussing a man's murder is a "game", that say a lot about you!

Anyway, after that bit of unpleasantness let's analyze some of Weidmann's plethora of lies, misrepresentations and fantasies.

1. Oswald ordered C20-T750 from Kleins and Oswald received C20-T750 from Kleins.

2. If the bag fits you can't acquit!



3. Frazier repeatedly says he didn't pay much attention to Oswald's bag.

Mr. BALL - All right. When you got in the car did you say anything to him or did he say anything to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention and I said, "What's the package, Lee?"
And he said, "Curtain rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today."
That is the reason, the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that.

Mr. BALL - Did it look to you as if there was something heavy in the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much attention to the package because like I say before and after he told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any reason to doubt his word.

Mr. BALL - Well, from the way he carried it, the way he walked, did it appear he was carrying something that had more than the weight of a paper?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, you know like I say, I didn't pay much attention to the package other than I knew he had it under his arm and I didn't pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn't pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.

Mr. BALL - You will notice that this bag which is the colored bag, FBI Exhibit No. 10, is folded over. Was it folded over when you saw it the first time, folded over to the end?
Mr. FRAZIER - I will say I am not sure about that, whether it was folded over or not, because, like I say, I didn't pay that much attention to it.

Mr. BALL - But are you sure that his hand was at the end of the package or at the side of the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I said, I remember I didn't look at the package very much, paying much attention, but when I did look at it he did have his hands on the package like that.

Mr. BALL - Mr. Frazier, we have here this Exhibit No. 364 which is a sack and in that we have put a dismantled gun. Don't pay any attention to that. Will you stand up here and put this under your arm and then take a hold of it at the side?
Now, is that anywhere near similar to the way that Oswald carried the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, you know, like I said now, I said I didn't pay much attention--

4. The rear stairs are on the opposite side of the building to Elm street. And let's not forget that 90 seconds after the assassination amid all the sirens and screaming, Oswald was on the other side of the 2nd floor vestibule door, moving in a direction away from the stairs and was calmly getting himself a coke!

Mr. DULLES - Had he meanwhile gone on through the door ahead of you?
Mr. BAKER - I can't say whether he had gone on through that door or not. All I did was catch a glance at him, and evidently he was--this door might have been, you know, closing and almost shut at that time.

Mr. DULLES - Could you tell us anything more about his appearance, what he was doing, get an impression of the man at all? Did he seem to be hurrying, anything of that kind?
Mr. BAKER - Evidently he was hurrying because at this point here, I was running, and I ran on over here to this door.
Mr. BELIN - What door number on that?
Mr. BAKER - This would be 23.



5. We know Oswald was at or very near to the corner of Patton and Tenth because almost a dozen eyewitnesses positively identified him.

6. Markham's time estimate was taken from an unverified timepiece and besides wasn't it Weidmann who called Markham a "Screwball"? Why yes, yes he did!

...who was an even bigger screwball than Markham,

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

So you think discussing a man's murder is a "game", that say a lot about you!

Anyway after that bit of unpleasantness let's analyze some of Weidmann's plethora of lies, misrepresentations and fantasies.

1. Oswald ordered C20-T750 from Kleins and Oswald received C20-T750 from Kleins.

2. If the bag fits you can't acquit!



3. Frazier repeatedly says he didn't pay much attention to Oswald's bag.

Mr. BALL - All right. When you got in the car did you say anything to him or did he say anything to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention and I said, "What's the package, Lee?"
And he said, "Curtain rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today."
That is the reason, the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that.

Mr. BALL - Did it look to you as if there was something heavy in the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much attention to the package because like I say before and after he told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any reason to doubt his word.

Mr. BALL - Well, from the way he carried it, the way he walked, did it appear he was carrying something that had more than the weight of a paper?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, you know like I say, I didn't pay much attention to the package other than I knew he had it under his arm and I didn't pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn't pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.

Mr. BALL - You will notice that this bag which is the colored bag, FBI Exhibit No. 10, is folded over. Was it folded over when you saw it the first time, folded over to the end?
Mr. FRAZIER - I will say I am not sure about that, whether it was folded over or not, because, like I say, I didn't pay that much attention to it.

Mr. BALL - But are you sure that his hand was at the end of the package or at the side of the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I said, I remember I didn't look at the package very much, paying much attention, but when I did look at it he did have his hands on the package like that.

Mr. BALL - Mr. Frazier, we have here this Exhibit No. 364 which is a sack and in that we have put a dismantled gun. Don't pay any attention to that. Will you stand up here and put this under your arm and then take a hold of it at the side?
Now, is that anywhere near similar to the way that Oswald carried the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, you know, like I said now, I said I didn't pay much attention--

4. The rear stairs are on the opposite side of the building to Elm street.

5. We know Oswald was at or very near to the corner of Patton and Tenth because almost a dozen eyewitnesses positively identified him.

6. Markham's time estimate was taken from an unverified timepiece and besides wasn't it Weidmann who called Markham a "Screwball"? Why yes, yes he did!

JohnM

Oh boy, your level of desperation is so pathetic.

Do you really think you can make some extremely superficial comments and somehow make a conclusive compelling case? 

The utter BS you have written here doesn't even warrant a reply. At least try to make some sort of coherent argument next time, because what you've come up with so far is nonsense.

[John Mytton]

Oh boy, your level of desperation is so pathetic.

Do you really think you can make some extremely superficial comments and somehow make a conclusive compelling case? 

The utter BS you have written here doesn't even warrant a reply. At least try to make some sort of coherent argument next time, because what you've come up with so far is nonsense.

No worries, it was fully expected that after being presented with this powerful irrefutable evidence, you'd run away.

Now, run little doggie, run!



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

No worries, it was fully expected that after being presented with this powerful irrefutable evidence, you'd run away.

Now, run little doggie, run!

JohnM

That's the best you've got? Another pathetic attempt at ridicule? You can't be more creative for once?

You don't know the meaning of "powerful irrefutable evidence", but I get it. As per usual, you just haven't got anything of significance to say. Anybody who posts a floorplan of the TSBD which shows where the stairs are as "evidence" that Oswald did manage to come down those stairs unseen in less than 75 seconds after the last shot, needs to have his head examined.

There is just no point in kicking your ass time after time because you will always try to change the subject in any way you can.

What you will never do is actually discuss the case in detail! You are just like a bad skin rash that won't go away.

[Richard Smith]

well i think that you highlight very well indeed the great difficulty one has in attempting any sort of intelligent conversation with an LN mentality .

let us just re cap  .

i have stated that YOUR warren commission and its FBI experts  , told us that the fibers allegedly from Oswalds brown shirt were found on the rifle in evidence , and that they were FRESH .and we know the official version of events and the LN stance , which is that Oswald wore the brown short in work and left the fibers on the rifle at 12.30 having fired the shots .i have informed you here of the FACT (and yes im certain you were already aware of it ) that interrogation notes state that Oswald told them that he CHANGED his shirt and slacks 1t 1pm while at his rooming house .and that ONLY there and then did he put on the brown shirt that HE WAS ARRESTED IN .

if the above is indeed TRUE well then the following must also be true .

1/ Oswald wore a red shirt in work and NOT the brown shirt he was Later arrested in .
2/ Oswald ONLY put on that brown shirt at 1pm at his rooming house , some 30 minutes after the assassination .
3/ that FRESH fibers from the brown shirt were found on the rifle by the FBI , when according to interrogation notes Oswald NEVER wore that shirt that day in work .

and the best you have is to first offer that oswald may have left FRESH fibers on the rifle some weeks or months prior , which would not be FRESH would they ? .

then you give us your bugliosi impression and tell us that FRESH FIBERS that should not be on the rifle dont matter , that we should not bother our little heads thinking about that at all . JUST FORGET ABOUT IT , IGNORE IT ,and move on ,  because all the evidence proved oswald did it . oh and we should all just take YOUR word that anything at all was indeed proven . lol .

You are not following.  I'm not disputing that Oswald wore the arrest shirt at the moment of the assassination and left the fibers on the rifle at that time.  To the contrary, that is almost certainly what did happen.  What I was addressing is your claim that it somehow poses a problem that fibers from Oswald's arrest shirt were found on the rifle.  Think about the logic of arguing that fibers linking a particular person to the murder weapon somehow lends itself to his innocence.  That is absurd.  If fibers from Oswald's shirt are on the rifle, that is just another link between him and the murder weapon and therefore the crime regardless of when they got there.  It does not lend itself to his innocence.  As I've tried to explain, even if you were correct, based on your assumption, that he changed shirts before his arrest, that would only mean his arrest shirt had come into contact with the rifle at some prior time.  It still links Oswald to the rifle used to commit the crime which lends itself to his guilt rather than his innocence.

Your claim is also premised entirely on Oswald's unsubstantiated statement that he changed shirts.  It is not a fact by a longshot that he actually changed his shirt.  In fact, it is very unlikely that Oswald wasted any time changing his clothes.  He knew he was the most wanted man in the world at that moment.  He was not going to linger at his boardinghouse waiting for the police.  The fact that he requested to be let out of the cab some distance away from his boardinghouse supports the conclusion that Oswald was concerned that the police might already be there by that point in time.  He was not wasting a second longer than necessary being there.  He came there to obtain his gun.  He is in and out. 

Assume for a second that Oswald was the assassin.  Why might he lie to the police and tell them that he had changed clothes after the assassination?  Because for all he knows someone had seen the assassin and provided a description including the manner of his dress.  What to do to muddy the waters?  Claim that he has changed clothes after the crime.  He can then argue that it is only an unlucky coincidence for him that he put on a shirt that is similar to the one as described by any witness as being worn by the assassin.  He knew his jacket would cover the shirt.  So there was no reason to take time to change the shirt to avoid detection for the assassination.  The jacket has to be discarded, however, after murdering Tippit in the presence of multiple witnesses because he knows the description of the Tippit shooter will include a reference to the suspect wearing a jacket. 

[Martin Weidmann]

You are not following.  I'm not disputing that Oswald wore the arrest shirt at the moment of the assassination and left the fibers on the rifle at that time.  To the contrary, that is almost certainly what did happen.  What I was addressing is your claim that it somehow poses a problem that fibers from Oswald's arrest shirt were found on the rifle.  Think about the logic of arguing that fibers linking a particular person to the murder weapon somehow lends itself to his innocence.  That is absurd.  If fibers from Oswald's shirt are on the rifle, that is just another link between him and the murder weapon and therefore the crime regardless of when they got there.  It does not lend itself to his innocence.  As I've tried to explain, even if you were correct, based on your assumption, that he changed shirts before his arrest, that would only mean his arrest shirt had come into contact with the rifle at some prior time.  It still links Oswald to the rifle used to commit the crime which lends itself to his guilt rather than his innocence.

Your claim is also premised entirely on Oswald's unsubstantiated statement that he changed shirts.  It is not a fact by a longshot that he actually changed his shirt.  In fact, it is very unlikely that Oswald wasted any time changing his clothes.  He knew he was the most wanted man in the world at that moment.  He was not going to linger at his boardinghouse waiting for the police.  The fact that he requested to be let out of the cab some distance away from his boardinghouse supports the conclusion that Oswald was concerned that the police might already be there by that point in time.  He was not wasting a second longer than necessary being there.  He came there to obtain his gun.  He is in and out. 

Assume for a second that Oswald was the assassin.  Why might he lie to the police and tell them that he had changed clothes after the assassination?  Because for all he knows someone had seen the assassin and provided a description including the manner of his dress.  What to do to muddy the waters?  Claim that he has changed clothes after the crime.  He can then argue that it is only an unlucky coincidence for him that he put on a shirt that is similar to the one as described by any witness as being worn by the assassin.  He knew his jacket would cover the shirt.  So there was no reason to take time to change the shirt to avoid detection for the assassination.  The jacket has to be discarded, however, after murdering Tippit in the presence of multiple witnesses because he knows the description of the Tippit shooter will include a reference to the suspect wearing a jacket.

Assume for a second that Oswald was the assassin.

Hilarious. Richard's "logic" is exclusively based on the pre-determined conclusion that Oswald was the assassin. All the assumptions made in this post rely absolutely on the premise that Oswald was the assassin.

As usual, Richard is looking for arguments to support his opinion. At no time does he let the actual evidence lead him to make an honest determination.