14:55 Bill is cherry-picking the one statement by Earlene Roberts that he can use to make his timeline work, and ignoring the rest.
17:39 Whaley in his initial affidavit from 11/22/63 said that he let his passenger off in the 500 block of Beckley, not just that this was the destination the passenger had asked for when he got into the cab.
24:09 the thing that Bill doesn’t appreciate here is that the FBI and Secret service were just as motivated as he is to make the Oswald timeline fit. So of course their time trials and estimates are going to err on the side of every step happening quick enough to make the desired story work.
27:18 “absolute earliest” is an admission that this is a best-case scenario not a typical one.
29:15 the problem is that Whaley’s timesheet says that this passenger got in the cab at 12:30. The standard excuse is that he rounded his times to 15 minute intervals. However, one look at the timesheet shows several entries that are not on 15 minute boundaries, and the closest 15 minute boundary to 12:48 would be 12:45 anyway.
45:20 The flaw in Bill’s argument here is the assumption that the walk from the cab drop off to the rooming house would be at a consistent rate of speed as a walk from the rooming house to 10th and Patton. Different walks, different times, different motivations. Besides, I watched the video of Bill’s “walk”, and he was hauling ass, in my opinion. Let’s assume the LN story is actually true and Oswald deliberately had the can driver go past the rooming house so that he could check for cops. Once he verified there were no cops, why would he go an additional 4 blocks, and why would he then conspicuously power-walk/trot back up a major thoroughfare to get back and risk calling attention to himself? And then why would he be hauling ass like this in the direction of 10th and Patton? To get where?
53:38 the video that Bill ended up posting is not a walk from Beckley and Neely to the rooming house — it’s a walk from the rooming house to 10th and Patton. Granted, a portion of that goes past the Beckley and Neely intersection, but it doesn’t account at all for crossing the street in a southerly direction, waiting for Whaley to drive off, and flipping around.
1:00:11 Bill’s argument here is that ”it’s not absolutely impossible that Oswald arrived at the rooming house at 12:59, therefore he did.
1:04:42 What? The mere fact that it is being questioned makes it questionable. By definition.
1:10:50 why would you need to get on 10th Street at all to get to Jefferson and Marsalis?
1:11:50 why is it a problem for the barbershop sighting to be before noon? And how does Bill know it was necessarily before noon?
1:21:40 Scoggins doesn’t say in his testimony that he got back to his cab just in time for the shooting.
1:33:04 Bill is making yet another “It’s not impossible, therefore it happened” argument here. It’s not impossible that they all missed seeing the guy walking east the first time, therefore that’s what he did.
1:39:57 if he got to the bend in 10th Street and saw a police car 3 blocks down at Jefferson, why not just turn down Lansing? Way less conspicuous than doing an about-face.
1:44:00 Another one of these arguments. It’s not impossible for there to have been a fifth shot and both a Remington bullet and a Winchester shell were “never found”. Therefore that’s what happened.
1:55:28 what Bill fails to mention here is that ALL .38 special bullets have 5 lands and grooves and a right twist.
1:55:48 This argument is a really transparent attempt to have it both ways. If the evidence was conclusive, Bill would say that’s because Oswald did it. If the evidence is inconclusive, he says that’s “framers” would claim the evidence was conclusive, therefore there were no “framers”, therefore Oswald did it.
2:00:39 Is there any example in any part of the Warren Commission proceedings where they sought a second opinion from a non-FBI agent when the FBI analysis was what they wanted to hear?
2:03:32 false. Virginia Davis testified that Barbara found a shell and she saw her pick it up. Bill claims here that Doughty picked up a shell.
2:03:53 Doughty and Dhority could only identify shells that were handed to them. They wouldn’t have any firsthand knowledge of where those shells came from.
By the way, the whole narrative about evidence being shown to various people is in an anonymously written letter (CE2011), and agent Bardwell Odum is on record as saying that the parts that apply to him regarding CE399 didn’t happen.
2:08:54 It doesn’t matter what Mary and Robert Brock said. The only thing they witnessed was a guy walking past a building.
2:09:24 what Bill left out is that the FBI report on Reynolds says “he would hesitate to definitely identify OSWALD as the individual.”
2:13:35 Benavides and Scoggins weren’t “outdoors”. They were inside their vehicles.
2:14:43 Bill doesn’t know for a fact that what he has heard is the complete interview of Burt by Chapman, nor does he know for a fact that this is the only time Burt talked to Chapman.
2:16:20 Bill doesn’t know if Oswald’s shirt was unbuttoned or not before he was involved in the struggle in the theater.
2:18:18 Hang on. If Oswald had a jacket on over his shirt, and Roberts saw him zipping it up, and the witnesses couldn’t tell what kind of shirt the guy they saw had on because it was covered up by the jacket, then why did any of them describe a shirt color at all?
