Oswald's sack in the Sniper's nest.

[Martin Weidmann]

Two geniuses on the same forum.  What are the odds?

The odds are a lot better that those for you actually dealing honestly with evidence for once and not tell us what Oswald was thinking, planning and doing....

[John Tonkovich]

Who said there isn't any new evidence to be found?
Here's Oswald's sack in the Sniper's nest.





Btw I can't find the poster who originally found this groundbreaking evidence but if it was you, tell me and I will credit you!

EDIT
JohnM

Studebaker, in his testimony, references a photograph ( exhibit F) where he had drawn in - dotted lines - the outline of the bag, showing where he found it, on the floor, in the sniper's nest, near the pipes.
Sadly, no photograph was taken of the bag in this location.

So, are you saying the bag was placed on top of the - three high - stack of boxes, and then photographed, inadvertently?

[Charles Collins]

Studebaker, in his testimony, references a photograph ( exhibit F) where he had drawn in - dotted lines - the outline of the bag, showing where he found it, on the floor, in the sniper's nest, near the pipes.
Sadly, no photograph was taken of the bag in this location.

So, are you saying the bag was placed on top of the - three high - stack of boxes, and then photographed, inadvertently?

So, are you saying the bag was placed on top of the - three high - stack of boxes, and then photographed, inadvertently?

That makes more sense to me than the bag being found unfolded on top of the boxes, inadvertently photographed, then folded up and placed on the floor in the corner where Studebaker testified that he found it.

What is surprising to me is that apparently the bag in the photograph wasn’t identified for 56-years... and it is exciting to now see it there now! Thanks again to Patrick!

[Peter Goth]

Studebaker, in his testimony, references a photograph ( exhibit F) where he had drawn in - dotted lines - the outline of the bag, showing where he found it, on the floor, in the sniper's nest, near the pipes.
Sadly, no photograph was taken of the bag in this location.

So, are you saying the bag was placed on top of the - three high - stack of boxes, and then photographed, inadvertently?

Colored lights can hypnotize

[Peter Goth]

What is surprising to me is that apparently the bag in the photograph wasn’t identified for 56-years... and it is exciting to now see it there now! Thanks again to Patrick!

that's f-n hilarious !!

[Steve M. Galbraith]

The odds are a lot better that those for you actually dealing honestly with evidence for once and not tell us what Oswald was thinking, planning and doing....

As opposed to telling us what LBJ and Hoover and the DPD and Brewer and Postal and Norman and Brennan and Markham and on and on and on.... thought?

This forum is filled with all sorts of claims from the conspiracy crowd as to why "they" had to kill JFK. And how they planned it and carried it out. We have conspiracists telling us all of these bizarre stories about why LBJ did this or Fitz did that or why this was done or that was done.

For you to come along and complain about posters telling us what Oswald thought while all of this above conspiracy fantasies are promoted is not, for me, a "good faith" complaint.

[John Iacoletti]

This forum is filled with all sorts of claims from the conspiracy crowd as to why "they" had to kill JFK. And how they planned it and carried it out. We have conspiracists telling us all of these bizarre stories about why LBJ did this or Fitz did that or why this was done or that was done.

I'm not sure why Martin would be responsible for that.

Maybe if we just stuck to the actual evidence, we wouldn't have this problem.

[John Tonkovich]

As opposed to telling us what LBJ and Hoover and the DPD and Brewer and Postal and Norman and Brennan and Markham and on and on and on.... thought?

This forum is filled with all sorts of claims from the conspiracy crowd as to why "they" had to kill JFK. And how they planned it and carried it out. We have conspiracists telling us all of these bizarre stories about why LBJ did this or Fitz did that or why this was done or that was done.

For you to come along and complain about posters telling us what Oswald thought while all of this above conspiracy fantasies are promoted is not, for me, a "good faith" complaint.

While there are some here who promote certain ( bizarre, unproven, ) " conspiracy" theories, there are plenty of people, including me, who are merely skeptical of the official story and point out inconsistencies, omissions and falsehoods therein. I.e. SBT, associations and motives of Jack Ruby, timeline of Oswald's activities presented, pre ,post, and during the assassination etc.

You are painting with a broad brush, and creating a "strawman" as a defense? I guess, of the Warren Commission. Instead, perhaps you could respond to the actual issues. Specifically, in this case, the rather shoddy and incomplete evidence regarding the "gunsack", and its provenance. We have conflicting stories from Studebaker, Day and Roy Truly. We have no photographs of the bag in situ. We have a photograph allegedly taken when the bag was resting on top of the stack of boxes. When was this taken? Why was the bag just lying there? Had it not already been taken into evidence?
These are just honest questions.

Oswald may well have been the actual assassin, and murderer of Tippit; the official story, at this point, does not support it's own conclusion.