I'm having major difficulties wrapping my head around this "scenario" as the implications are staggering. My main concern is that this entire theory is derived from a comment made by Jarman to the HSCA about what Lovelady is supposed to have told him some 15 years earlier.
Happy to allay your concern, Mr Weidmann: the 'entire theory' is most certainly not 'derived from a comment made by Jarman to the HSCA.' That's only one clue among many as to what really happened.
Now! Let's get one thing clear. The idea that Mr Oswald went out front to watch the motorcade is not
our theory, it is
his own claim:
Kindly note: Captain Fritz, Agents Bookhout & Hosty, et al
suppressed this claim (it only came to light last year!). Now why do you think they might have wanted to lie about what Mr Oswald told them as to his whereabouts at the time of the assassination?
The idea that Mr Oswald had an encounter with an officer at the front entrance just after the assassination is not
our theory, it is both
Mr Oswald's own claim (as recalled by Postal Inspector Holmes)
and the information first given to the press on 11/22/63
by the DPD.
This case now comes down to
two rival claims:
1. Mr Oswald's (
I went outside to watch the P. parade)
2. The official "investigators'" (
He shot JFK from the sixth floor)
Claim #2 has had 57 years to vindicate itself, and the results have been v. poor, to say the least.
Claim #1 is in the rudest of rude health. It constitutes not just the only serious counter-claim to the official theory-------------it's looking more and more like the only serious claim, period.
All we're doing here is merely reestablishing the basic facts that were already known to Captain Fritz & Co. by the early afternoon of 11/22/63!
