A hole in Bledsoe's story?

[John Mytton]

Sorry Martin, your claim comes from not being able to see through a closed window when you allegedly visited the 6th floor museum, but not only was the window open on the 22nd but Oswald was sitting sideways on the window, did you try sitting sideways on the sniper's nest window when you visited the 6th floor museum? Or as usual are you making self serving assumptions?! Try again.

There is no need for me to try again. You've already made a fool of yourself. Anybody who claims that a person on the 6th floor not only can see people standing below him at street level but also walking next to the building in Houston is just either delusional or a liar. Which one are you?

Calm down Martin before you pop!



Of course you can look down to street level if you are sitting sideways high up on a window sill, haven't you never left your Parents basement?

And Oswald who had an obvious vested interest in keeping track of what was happening with his fellow employees, sees Junior and Norman disappear from below and then he can hear them suddenly appear on the floor right below, Oswald knows that they didn't get Beamed up ala Star Trek, but went up by the rear lift/stairs.

BTW have you worked out yet what a "room" is? Hahahaha!

• Just one more thing that I need to post!

Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he told me he was having lunch when the President was shot.
Mr. BALL. With whom?
Mr. FRITZ. With someone called Junior, someone he worked with down there, but he didn't remember the other boy's name.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what he was eating?

Jarman says that he never saw Oswald after 12 PM
 
The last time I saw Lee Oswald on Friday, November 22, 1963 was between 11:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon when he was taking the elevator upstairs to go get some boxes.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/jarman1.htm

Norman testified that to the best of his memory that he never saw Oswald after 10 AM

On the 22nd of November, 1963, to the best of my memory, the last time I saw him was about 10:00 A.M. when we were both working on the first floor of the building. I did not speak to him at that time.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/norman_1.htm

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Calm down Martin before you pop!



Of course you can look down to street level if you are sitting sideways high up on a window sill, haven't you never left your Parents basement?

And Oswald who had an obvious vested interest in keeping track of what was happening with his fellow employees, sees Junior and Norman disappear from below and then he can hear them suddenly appear on the floor right below, Oswald knows that they didn't get Beamed up ala Star Trek, but went up by the rear lift/stairs.

BTW have you worked out yet what a "room" is? Hahahaha!

Just one more thing that I need to post!

Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; he told me he was having lunch when the President was shot.
Mr. BALL. With whom?
Mr. FRITZ. With someone called Junior, someone he worked with down there, but he didn't remember the other boy's name.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what he was eating?

The last time I saw Lee Oswald on Friday, November 22, 1963 was between 11:30 a.m. and 12:00 noon when he was taking the elevator upstairs to go get some boxes.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/jarman1.htm

On the 22nd of November, 1963, to the best of my memory, the last time I saw him was about 10:00 A.M. when we were both working on the first floor of the building. I did not speak to him at that time.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/norman_1.htm

JohnM

Getting desperate again, Johnny?

[Dan O'meara]

[quohttps://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Themes/FadedCurve/images/bbc/img.gifte author=Dan O'meara link=topic=4212.msg161930#msg161930 date=1742434482]
If I was attributing a quote to you I would have put it in quotation marks.
But I didn't.

For anyone unfamiliar with John's 'all colours turn white in daylight' theory just go to "The Man On The 6th Floor" thread where you will see it treated with the contempt it deserves.
In short, four of the five eyewitnesses who described the man on the 6th floor have him wearing an open-necked sports shirt that is so light coloured it almost appears white. Almost but not quite. This is a massive problem for those, like John, who believe it was Oswald who took the shots because Oswald wasn't wearing such a shirt that day.
The assassin was wearing clothes that Oswald wasn't.
It's just one piece of evidence among many supporting the view that it wasn't Oswald who actually took the shots.
So, how does John deal with this inconvenient piece of evidence?
His method is to take an overexposed photograph of Oswald that has the sun shining on some parts of his shirt. The part of the shirt that has the sun shining on it makes the colour of the shirt look almost white because the picture is overexposed.
He then argues that this is why the shirt the eyewitnesses saw the man on the 6th floor wearing looked almost white - because the sun was shining on it. He tries to argue that the effect of sunlight on colour in an overexposed photograph is the same effect seen in normal sunlight. He is, in effect, arguing that daylight turns all colours white.

You might think I'm joking but I'm not.
Anyone interested in this nonsense can find it at "The Man On The 6th Floor" thread.


Interesting so you admit your quote of what I supposedly said 'all colours turn white in daylight' was a lie! Despicable!

Brennan who got the best look for a length of time describes Khaki coloured.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what kind of clothes he was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Light colored clothes, more of a khaki color.

And for the nth time Oswald's shirt appeared a light Khaki when exposed to the sun.





JohnM

And for the nth time Oswald's shirt appeared a light Khaki when exposed to the sun.

I literally can't believe you're standing by this argument.

This is the actual shirt that Oswald is wearing in the photo John posted and this is the colour it would have appeared in daylight:



The day of the assassination was a beautiful, clear day. Blue skies and sunshine. The perfect day for the human eye to detect the full spectrum of visible colour.
Oswald's shirt would have appeared the colour that it really was.
John's argument, that this colour would have bleached to the almost white colour he points out in the overexposed photo he posted, is bizarre bordering on disturbing.
He has been given the chance to retract this nonsense but instead he's decided to double down on it.

Why has he taken this irrational path?
Ronald Fischer, Bob Edwards, Arnold Rowland and Howard Brennan all describe the man on the 6th floor wearing a shirt that was so light coloured it was almost white.
They are describing clothes that Oswald wasn't wearing that day.
This is one piece of powerful evidence that the assassin was not Oswald.
If it was just one eyewitness it could be brushed off, but it's four.
LNers have to deal with this and, in a panic, end up spouting the kind of irrational nonsense John is, rather than accept the evidence.
John should do what all other LNers do with this type of evidence - stay quiet until it has passed by.

[Charles Collins]

Hilarious. Charles basically agrees with Dan about the purpose for the FBI taking the shirt to Bledsoe's house. They wanted to find out what she remembered.

The problem with Charles' version is that it doesn't explain why they brought the actual shirt along. If they only wanted to know what Bledsoe remembered, they simply could have asked her. So, what was the purpose of bringing the shirt to her house?

The questions should be:

Why wouldn’t they bring the actual shirt along?

Why wouldn’t they want to show this shirt to Bledsoe and any others who saw LHO that day?

Why is this supposed to be something sinister (in your imagination)?

What is wrong with your thinking?

[Charles Collins]

Let me get this straight.
According to Willens, Hoover's report to the Commission "identified Oswald as the killer", "conclusively showing that Oswald did assassinate the President" and that there was "no evidence that Oswald was part of a conspiracy to kill the president".

Hoover had already decided exactly this outcome less than 48 hours after the assassination.
He decided exactly this outcome before the investigation had barely started.
Don't you find that strange?
Is this another in the long line of things that you're not surprised about, that you should be surprised about?

As you've already posted, according to Willens:

"If the president had to have this commission, its function should be to receive the FBI’s report, review it, ask questions aimed at clarifying its findings, then endorse the report and disband."

The Warren Commission was nothing more than a rubber stamp for Hoover's predetermined outcome - that Oswald was the lone assassin.
What you've posted, as some kind of attempt to show otherwise, only confirms this.
I'd advise a little less reading what others think and more finding out for yourself.

Don't you find that strange?

The Dallas Police Department and District Attorney decided there was enough evidence to charge LHO with two murders within 12-hours of the assassination. When all the evidence points to LHO, and only LHO, that is the logical conclusion. The only thing I find strange is why, over 60-years later, people are still skeptical.


The Warren Commission was nothing more than a rubber stamp for Hoover's predetermined outcome - that Oswald was the lone assassin.

That is simply not true. It was apparently what Hoover himself would have preferred. But the Warren Commission and its staff took their assignment very seriously. Willens’ read their report before it even went to the White House. I already posted what he wrote about his reading of it. The creation of the Warren Commission ensured that Hoover would not have the final word. You don’t have to look very hard to see that this is true.

[Charles Collins]

As I said before, the FBI (on 12/4/63) had no way of knowing how the Warren Commission was going to proceed

So, they just investigated the case without knowing what the purpose of the investigation was? Really?

It wouldn't take a genius to work out what the WC investigation would be about.

That was apparently the mindset of the FBI at that point in time. The FBI had not yet even submitted its report to JFK.

First of all, you probably mean LBJ instead of JFK.

Secondly, how in the world is it apparent to you what the mindset of the FBI was at that point in time?

Hoover declared Oswald guilty on 11/24/63 in a memo he wrote to LBJ. Before the end of the following week, Hoover presented LBJ with a FBI report which basically said the same thing. He then made clear to LBJ that he was not in favor of any other investigation.

And you still assume that Hoover had no clue how an investigation, other than his own, would proceed? Really?

Yet, your fantasy has them plotting to establish something so that Bledsoe would testify a certain way?

Prove me wrong and give me another plausible reason for two FBI agents taking Oswald's shirt to Bledsoe's house?

It is astonishing that anyone could actually believe such a scenario as you described it.

No, what is astonishing is that you seem to believe that, after Hoover had already submitted the FBI report and a memo to LBJ, two FBI agents nevertheless took a piece of evidence to a witness' home for the purpose of an identification without actually having a sound reason to do so.

You previously said;

Which begs the question, why would they want to know that? Was it just curiosity? And if not, what was the purpose for the visit?

No, what is astonishing is that you seem to believe that, after Hoover had already submitted the FBI report and a memo to LBJ, two FBI agents nevertheless took a piece of evidence to a witness' home for the purpose of an identification without actually having a sound reason to do so.

You are wrong again. The report dated 12/4/63 is clearly before Hoover submitted the report late in the day on 12/5/63. The FBI clearly had reason (and an obligation) to interview Bledsoe.

[Dan O'meara]

Don't you find that strange?

The Dallas Police Department and District Attorney decided there was enough evidence to charge LHO with two murders within 12-hours of the assassination. When all the evidence points to LHO, and only LHO, that is the logical conclusion. The only thing I find strange is why, over 60-years later, people are still skeptical.

You were asked whether or not you found it strange that Hoover had determined the outcome of the investigation into the assassination before the investigation had barely begun and that this was exactly the outcome the FBI report reached.
That is what you were asked about.
You have decided to deflect from this straight forward question because, like any rationally minded person, you do find it immensely strange but are unwilling to say so because you think it undermines what you believe about this case (IMO)
When it has been decided that the outcome of the investigation is that LHO was the lone shooter, then all the evidence is going to show exactly that.

The Warren Commission was nothing more than a rubber stamp for Hoover's predetermined outcome - that Oswald was the lone assassin.

That is simply not true. It was apparently what Hoover himself would have preferred. But the Warren Commission and its staff took their assignment very seriously. Willens’ read their report before it even went to the White House. I already posted what he wrote about his reading of it. The creation of the Warren Commission ensured that Hoover would not have the final word. You don’t have to look very hard to see that this is true.

That is simply not true.

Yes it is, and the quotes you've posted from Willens confirm this.
Hoover did have the last word. The Warren Commission went along for the ride.
You don't have to look very hard to see that this is true.

[John Mytton]

And for the nth time Oswald's shirt appeared a light Khaki when exposed to the sun.

I literally can't believe you're standing by this argument.

This is the actual shirt that Oswald is wearing in the photo John posted and this is the colour it would have appeared in daylight:



The day of the assassination was a beautiful, clear day. Blue skies and sunshine. The perfect day for the human eye to detect the full spectrum of visible colour.
Oswald's shirt would have appeared the colour that it really was.
John's argument, that this colour would have bleached to the almost white colour he points out in the overexposed photo he posted, is bizarre bordering on disturbing.
He has been given the chance to retract this nonsense but instead he's decided to double down on it.

Why has he taken this irrational path?
Ronald Fischer, Bob Edwards, Arnold Rowland and Howard Brennan all describe the man on the 6th floor wearing a shirt that was so light coloured it was almost white.
They are describing clothes that Oswald wasn't wearing that day.
This is one piece of powerful evidence that the assassin was not Oswald.
If it was just one eyewitness it could be brushed off, but it's four.
LNers have to deal with this and, in a panic, end up spouting the kind of irrational nonsense John is, rather than accept the evidence.
John should do what all other LNers do with this type of evidence - stay quiet until it has passed by.

I had a close look at the testimonies of Fischer and Edwards, to see what may be missing from your abbreviated synopsis.

Edwards saw Oswald for the total time of a few seconds, WOW! And describes an open neck shirt.

Mr. BELIN - How long did you look at him?
Mr. EDWARDS - Just a few seconds.

Mr. BELIN - What kind of clothes did he have on?
Mr. EDWARDS - Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck.

Fischer who saw Oswald after being alerted by Edwards sees Oswald for 10 to 15 seconds and says that Oswald was wearing an open neck shirt which could have been a T-Shirt, a small detail that you omitted.

Mr. FISCHER - .......And I looked up and I watched the man for, oh, I'd say, 10 or 15 seconds.

Mr. FISCHER - He was in the---as you're looking toward that window, he was in the lower right portion of the window. He seemed to be sitting a little forward.
And he had--he had on an open-neck shirt, but it-uh--could have been a sport shirt or a T-shirt. It was light in color; probably white,

While I still believe that they saw Oswald's shirt which was much lighter in sunlight, another plausible consideration which satisfies your criteria is the following photo which after a quick look of just seconds, appears white.



And as for Rowland he saw an elderly negro, and along with his history of exaggeration and lies, he will not be considered. Window "A" is the sniper's nest window.

Mr. SPECTER - At about what time was it that you observed someone hanging out of the window that you have marked as window "A"?
Mr. ROWLAND - Again about 12:15 just before I noticed the other man.
Mr. SPECTER - You have marked the double window there. Would you draw the arrow in the red pencil indicating specifically which window it was.
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.



JohnM