Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Charles Collins]

On what basis did he determine that the tolerances were within "a minute or two"?

This was explained earlier in this thread. It has to do with when the DPD decided that the clocks were far enough off and needed to be synchronized. Have you read the earlier posts?

[Martin Weidmann]

The fact remains that Bowles clearly states that the recordings/transcripts can not be relied on to provide accurate times.

The key word (that you finally used) is: “accurate.”

The main thrust of the interview is explaining why the acoustics experts’ report to the HSCA was invalid. The acoustics experts tried to show that the timing on the recordings could be accurate enough to indicate exactly who was where at very specific exacting times. Bowles was explaining why they are not THAT accurate.

Bowles’ explanation does indicate how accurate they could be relied upon to be (one to two minute tolerances). He certainly doesn’t say that they are useless (as your spin tries to suggest). Only that they couldn’t be as accurate as the acoustics experts wanted them to be.

When the recordings are not accurate enough "to indicate exactly who was where at very specific exacting times", it's also not accurate enough to pin down the exact times around Tippit's shooting.

You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too...

Btw, Bowles did indeed not say they were useless (your choice of word) he actually said that they can not be relied on under no circumstance

So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time references by the belt or any continuity on time references because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity... - James C. Bowles, Communications Supervisor of the Dallas Police Department.

[Charles Collins]

When the recordings are not accurate enough "to indicate exactly who was where at very specific exacting times", it's also not accurate enough to pin down the exact times around Tippit's shooting.

You seem to want to have your cake and eat it too...

Btw, Bowles did indeed not say they were useless (your choice of word) he actually said that they can not be relied on under no circumstance

So, under no circumstance could you put any stock in the real world time references by the belt or any continuity on time references because there were no time references on the belt; they were only spoken times, and those spoken times had no faithful validity... - James C. Bowles, Communications Supervisor of the Dallas Police Department.

No one needs the “exact” times around Tippit’s shooting. At least not as exacting as the acoustics experts needed for their endeavors.

“Btw, Bowles did indeed not say they were useless (your choice of word) he actually said that they can not be relied on under no circumstance”

There you go again trying to take a partial sentence and spin it. And again you screwed up the words.

[Martin Weidmann]

No one needs the “exact” times around Tippit’s shooting. At least not as exacting as the acoustics experts needed for their endeavors.

“Btw, Bowles did indeed not say they were useless (your choice of word) he actually said that they can not be relied on under no circumstance”

There you go again trying to take a partial sentence and spin it. And again you screwed up the words.

Sorry, I can not argue with dishonest 

[Charles Collins]

Sorry, I can not argue with dishonest 

You might at least explain specifically what you believe is dishonest

Is it something that I said, or are you referring to Bowles?

[John Iacoletti]

This was explained earlier in this thread. It has to do with when the DPD decided that the clocks were far enough off and needed to be synchronized. Have you read the earlier posts?

Yes, I have.

First of all, Bowles said “Usually we didn’t change them until they became at least two minutes or more out of synchronization of each other.”

Secondly, whether the dispatcher clocks were synchronized with each other or not, that tells you nothing about how accurately either one was set to any time standard.

[Charles Collins]

Yes, I have.

First of all, Bowles said “Usually we didn’t change them until they became at least two minutes or more out of synchronization of each other.”

Secondly, whether the dispatcher clocks were synchronized with each other or not, that tells you nothing about how accurately either one was set to any time standard.

First of all, Bowles said “Usually we didn’t change them until they became at least two minutes or more out of synchronization of each other.”

Here are the preceding two sentences:

“There was no way in the world that some six clocks in the telephone room and the two clocks in the dispatching room were synchronized. They could be as much as a minute or two apart.”

The above statement includes all eight clocks.

Here are the four sentences that follow your selected sentence:

“There was one clock in the office that had a generally reliable time. It was on the back wall of the telephone room. The only trouble was that it was way back in the corner which you could hardly see, and nobody ever looked at it. It was just there. They’d use it only when they wanted to check its time versus the other time.”

Now that we have all seven pertinent sentences to look at, it appears that if any one of the clocks became two minutes out of sync it was synchronized. Yes I will concede that it was possible for one to become more than two minutes out of sync occasionally. However, the rule appears to be that two minutes was the point that normally triggered the synchronization.

[John Iacoletti]

First of all, Bowles said “Usually we didn’t change them until they became at least two minutes or more out of synchronization of each other.”

Here are the preceding two sentences:

“There was no way in the world that some six clocks in the telephone room and the two clocks in the dispatching room were synchronized. They could be as much as a minute or two apart.”

The above statement includes all eight clocks.

Since we're discussing the time checks made by the dispatcher, then what's relevant are the two clocks in the dispatching room.

Here are the four sentences that follow your selected sentence:

“There was one clock in the office that had a generally reliable time. It was on the back wall of the telephone room. The only trouble was that it was way back in the corner which you could hardly see, and nobody ever looked at it. It was just there. They’d use it only when they wanted to check its time versus the other time.”

What does "generally reliable time" even mean?  And if you could "hardly see it" then how could it have been used to synchronize the others?  And what was that clock synchronized to in order to make it "generally reliable"?

I think all this mess shows is that the time checks given by the dispatcher are unreliable, and the preponderance of the evidence is that Tippit was shot earlier than the official narrative wants it to have happened.