BWF and LMR may not have been the only ones who saw LHO with a bag on 11/22/1963

[Oscar Navarro]

Do you believe he just made this up? If so, why would he do so---especially just after giving to understand that he himself had not seen Mr Oswald carrying a package into the building first thing that morning?

Yes, I believe that Dougherty made that up. Let me read both Dougherty and Shelley's testimony and I'll get back to you.

[Alan Ford]

Yes, I believe that Dougherty made that up. Let me read both Dougherty and Shelley's testimony and I'll get back to you.

Great, Mr Navarro, thank you! The best way to discredit one unreliable witness is without doubt to weaponize the testimony of another 

[Richard Smith]

Mr Jack Dougherty to the Warren Commission:

Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened.

 

So does that mean Oswald was not carrying a package along the size estimated by Frazier?  CTers appear to want to have it both ways.  Relying on Frazier's estimate of a bag as gospel and also citing evidence that Oswald had no long bag at all.  It has to be one or the other.  It can't be both.

[Oscar Navarro]

Great, Mr Navarro, thank you! The best way to discredit one unreliable witness is without doubt to weaponize the testimony of another 

You want to rely on the testimony of Dougherty be my guest. What Mr. Shelley saw was the bag that held the chicken sandwich after the shooting and that's what he probably told Dougherty but, Dougherty being Dougherty, it became a good sized package. Shelley was again questioned after Dougherty and the subject didn't come up so Ball must have by then figured that Dougherty was not a very reliable witness.

[Alan Ford]

So does that mean Oswald was not carrying a package along the size estimated by Frazier?  CTers appear to want to have it both ways.  Relying on Frazier's estimate of a bag as gospel and also citing evidence that Oswald had no long bag at all.  It has to be one or the other.  It can't be both.

Honest researchers start with a question, kooks (of the LN or CT type) with an answer!

Something made Mr Oswald leave the Depository with undue haste, go back to his room, grab a pistol and go to a movie theatre.

You call that something, 'The fact that he had just shot JFK'. To which absurd proposition I react with a laugh!

I call that something, 'Possibly the rifle which he may, at some point, have brought into the Depository'. To which reasonable proposition you will react by repeating, automaton-like, 'He shot JFK! He shot JFK!'

A fun game! 

[Alan Ford]

You want to rely on the testimony of Dougherty be my guest. What Mr. Shelley saw was the bag that held the chicken sandwich after the shooting and that's what he probably told Dougherty

Are you thinking of the sandwich which Mr Shelley testified he had seen Mr C. Givens eating up there earlier in the day? Or the chicken which Mr Shelley more vaguely testified "those colored boys" were always eating?

I'm beginning to see why you consider Mr Shelley such a reliable witness, Mr Navarro-----you don't know his testimony very well! 

[Richard Smith]

Honest researchers start with a question, kooks (of the LN or CT type) with an answer!

Something made Mr Oswald leave the Depository with undue haste, go back to his room, grab a pistol and go to a movie theatre.

You call that something, 'The fact that he had just shot JFK'. To which absurd proposition I react with a laugh!

I call that something, 'Possibly the rifle which he may, at some point, have brought into the Depository'. To which reasonable proposition you will react by repeating, automaton-like, 'He shot JFK! He shot JFK!'

A fun game! 

I'm not sure what you are babbling about here. I noted that CTers argue that Frazier's estimate of the bag Oswald carried is correct but they also cite evidence that he carried no long bag at all.  Those are mutually inconsistent claims.  They both cannot be true.  So help us here and explain which of these two you are rejecting.  You should not cite evidence that Oswald had no long bag at all if you want to maintain a claim that he carried a bag along the lines estimated by Frazier.  It is intellectually dishonest.  Not that that ever has been a cause for concern among fringe CTers.

[Oscar Navarro]

Are you thinking of the sandwich which Mr Shelley testified he had seen Mr C. Givens eating up there earlier in the day? Or the chicken which Mr Shelley more vaguely testified "those colored boys" were always eating?

I'm beginning to see why you consider Mr Shelley such a reliable witness, Mr Navarro-----you don't know his testimony very well! 

 Mr. BALL - Now, did you find any chicken bones up there or see any?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, I went up later on that day; I believe after we had gotten back from City Hall with someone, I don't remember who it was, one of the officers and they got them.
Mr. BALL - They did what?
Mr. SHELLEY - They got the bones.
Mr. BALL - Where were they?
Mr. SHELLEY - They were on the third--yeah, it would be the third window from the southeast corner.
Mr. BALL - And were they in a sack?
Mr. SHELLEY - Laying on a sack.
Mr. BALL - Laying on a sack?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, sir; with a coke bottle sitting in the window.

That's the part of the testimony I'm referring to. Now, since you're such an expert in Shelley's testimony why don't you show when it was that he saw Givens with a lunch paper sack? Also, tell us why Shelley should not be considered a reliable witness as compared to Dougherty.