Did LHO know how to drive? Does it matter?

[John Iacoletti]

Facts, yes.  But their value isn't what you imply.

Brennan did indeed see the man with the rifle before the motorcade arrived.  This has been explained to you.

Before the motorcade arrived, Brennan saw a man up in the window.  After the shooting, Brennan saw that same man with the rifle.  Therefore, Brennan saw the man with the rifle before the motorcade arrived.

Perhaps you should learn the difference between that fact .... and a false claim that Brennan saw the rifle before the motorcade arrived.

Perhaps you shouldn't complain about spin when you engage in it in spades.

Fact, yes (once you play with the exact wording).  But its value isn't what you imply.

[John Iacoletti]

In my experienced professional opinion it's you and others that cannot show how Oswald's rights were violated in that theater.

You're a cop.  You of all people should understand probable cause.

[John Iacoletti]

You've agreed that Oswald could still be guilty for Tippit's death even if his rights were violated while inside the theater.  That's good enough for me.

I'm sure it is.  But you're the one who claims that there is no doubt of Oswald's guilt.  "Could be guilty" isn't particularly useful.  He could NOT be guilty as well.

[Rob Caprio]

This is why you are a Kook.

You clearly stated that no one "outside of the police" witnessed Oswald punching McDonald.  Now you're moving the goal posts by ignorantly trying to raise the question of whether Brewer is "relevant" or not.

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything. Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

"An officer approached him and he hit the officer and knocked him back."
12/6/63 Affidavit of Johnny Brewer

Where is the word "punch"? Where is the name "McDonald"? Remember according to McDonald he was the one grabbing LHO.

[Bill Chapman]

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything. Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

Where is the word "punch"? Where is the name "McDonald"? Remember according to McDonald he was the one grabbing LHO.

The name 'McDonald' is in the part of Brewer's testimony that you conveniently left out.

John Calvin Brewer WC Testimony
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brewer_j.htm

(...)

BREWER - Well, I saw this policeman approach Oswald, and Oswald stood up and I heard some hollering. I don't know exactly what he said, and this man hit Patrolman McDonald.
Mr. BELIN - You say this man hit Patrolman McDonald. Did you know it was Patrolman McDonald?
Mr. BREWER - I didn't know his name, but I had seen him quite a few times around Oak Cliff. But I didn't know his name.
Mr. BELIN - Then you later found out this was Patrolman McDonald?
Mr. BREWER - Yes.
Mr. BELIN - Did you say this man was the same man?
Mr. BREWER - The same man that had stood in my lobby that I followed to the show.
Mr. BELIN - Who hit who first?
Mr. BREWER - Oswald hit McDonald first, and he knocked him to the seat.
Mr. BELIN - Who knocked who?
Mr. BREWER - He knocked McDonald down. McDonald fell against one of the seats. And then real quick he was back up.

(...)

[Bill Brown]

Perhaps you shouldn't complain about spin when you engage in it in spades.

Fact, yes (once you play with the exact wording).  But its value isn't what you imply.

I'm not complaining about anything.  To say I am complaining is nothing more than that Iacoletti spin I was speaking about earlier.

What I am doing is telling you that regarding Oswald's guilt in the death of a police officer, no one gives a rat's ass whether or not his rights were violated when McDonald "assaulted" him by touching his belt line.

[Bill Brown]

I'm sure it is.  But you're the one who claims that there is no doubt of Oswald's guilt.  "Could be guilty" isn't particularly useful.  He could NOT be guilty as well.

Both are absolutely unrelated to whether or not Oswald's rights were violated while he was inside the theater.

But don't let that stop you from grandstanding some more.

[Bill Brown]

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything. Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

Where is the word "punch"? Where is the name "McDonald"? Remember according to McDonald he was the one grabbing LHO.

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything.

What a bunch of Kookspeak.

You basically said that no one "outside of the police" saw Oswald punch McDonald.  Brewer saw Oswald punch McDonald.  Brewer was never a member of the "police".

Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

My lack of knowledge?  Nice try, but that dog don't hunt.

I have personally corrected you on at least three dozen points since you've been a member of this forum and the previous one.

I even challenged you to a live debate where neither of us can rely on a Google search for their information.  All you did was make excuses for why you won't agree to that.