Ted Callaway & The 1:15 Shooting

[Jerry Freeman]

Based on that response, you now seem more of a nose-picker

And it took you half an hour to edit that one
Did Mommy help you?

[Bill Chapman]

And it took you half an hour to edit that one
Did Mommy help you?

I can tell you never edit yourself.

[Bill Chapman]

The words of a prosecutor in a Mickey Mouse court..... 

Who is your investigator? Goofy perhaps?

Only when writing for CTer 5-year-olds

[Bill Chapman]

she wasn't interested in the time.

Yeah sure... of course she wasn't interested in time. She only had to catch her regular bus to get to work on time. So, who needs to know the time for that?

Markham's "identification" and her manipulation by the WC laywers would have been destroyed during a cross-examination if there ever had been one.

What 'manipulation' might that be? You wouldn't happen to be calling Ball's frustration with Markham's quirky manner of response sinister by any chance, now would you..

Mr. BALL. Did you recognize the man from his clothing or from his face?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Mostly from his face.
Mr. BALL. Were you sure it was the same man you had seen before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I am sure.
Mr. BALL. Now, what time of day was it that you saw this man in the lineup?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I would say it was four, a little after.
Mr. BALL. That was four in the afternoon?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I was so upset I couldn't even tell you the time. In fact, I wasn't interested in the time.

Now go ahead and tell us Markham had all her wits about her that afternoon @Tippit..

[Martin Weidmann]

What 'manipulation' might that be? You wouldn't happen to be calling Ball's frustration with Markham's quirky manner of response sinister by any chance, now would you..

Mr. BALL. Did you recognize the man from his clothing or from his face?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Mostly from his face.
Mr. BALL. Were you sure it was the same man you had seen before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I am sure.
Mr. BALL. Now, what time of day was it that you saw this man in the lineup?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I would say it was four, a little after.
Mr. BALL. That was four in the afternoon?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I was so upset I couldn't even tell you the time. In fact, I wasn't interested in the time.

Now go ahead and tell us Markham had all her wits about her that afternoon @Tippit..

You clearly don't have any knowledge about how prosecutors can work when they don't get the answer they want from a witness.

Mr. BALL. Did you recognize anyone in the lineup?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. You did not? Did you see anybody--I have asked you that question before did you recognize anybody from their face?
Mrs. MARKHAM. From their face, no.
Mr. BALL. Did you identify anybody in these four people?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I didn't know nobody.
Mr. BALL. I know you didn't know anybody, but did anybody in that lineup look like anybody you had seen before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No. I had never seen none of them, none of these men.
Mr. BALL. No one of the four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No one of them.
Mr. BALL. No one of all four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was there a number two man in there?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Number two is the one I picked.

A clear case of leading the witness. Not allowed in court as it is witness manipulation!

It is amazing just how clueless you truly are.

Btw, in your previous post (before you edited it again) you falsely claimed about Markham that she said "the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm" and that she wasn't interested in time;

She also said 'number two'. She also said the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm (after earlier saying she left her house just after 1pm) and that she wasn't interested in the time. She also said she was nervous. Now tell us she had all her wits about her during testimony.

Seems it came down to her emotional response, fair lineup or not.

In this post your have exposed yourself as a liar, as she was actually talking about the line up being at 4pm and it is fully understandable that she wasn't interested in the time, at that moment, having seen a man being shot earlier that day.

Why do you want to be taken seriously, when you misrepresent evidence or refuse to even present any to back up your bogus claims?

[Bill Chapman]

You clearly don't have any knowledge about how prosecutors can work when they don't get the answer they want from a witness.

Mr. BALL. Did you recognize anyone in the lineup?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. You did not? Did you see anybody--I have asked you that question before did you recognize anybody from their face?
Mrs. MARKHAM. From their face, no.
Mr. BALL. Did you identify anybody in these four people?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I didn't know nobody.
Mr. BALL. I know you didn't know anybody, but did anybody in that lineup look like anybody you had seen before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No. I had never seen none of them, none of these men.
Mr. BALL. No one of the four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No one of them.
Mr. BALL. No one of all four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was there a number two man in there?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Number two is the one I picked.

A clear case of leading the witness. Not allowed in court as it is witness manipulation!

It is amazing just how clueless you truly are.

Btw, in your previous post (before you edited it again) you falsely claimed about Markham that she said "the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm" and that she wasn't interested in time;

In this post your have exposed yourself as a liar, as she was actually talking about the line up being at 4pm and it is fully understandable that she wasn't interested in the time, at that moment, having seen a man being shot earlier that day.

Why do you want to be taken seriously, when you misrepresent evidence or refuse to even present any to back up your bogus claims?

Btw, in your previous post (before you edited it again) you falsely claimed about Markham that she said "the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm" and that she wasn't interested in time
I didn't quote her saying that.

[Martin Weidmann]

Btw, in your previous post (before you edited it again) you falsely claimed about Markham that she said "the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm" and that she wasn't interested in time
I didn't quote her saying that.

BS

Regardless if you call it a quote or not, you claimed she said it;

She also said 'number two'. She also said the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm (after earlier saying she left her house just after 1pm) and that she wasn't interested in the time. She also said she was nervous. Now tell us she had all her wits about her during testimony.

Seems it came down to her emotional response, fair lineup or not.

That you altered the post after I quoted it in my reply, doesn't alter anything. You said it!

So, stop lying.

[Bill Chapman]

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2664.msg95211.html#msg95211

You clearly don't have any knowledge about how prosecutors can work when they don't get the answer they want from a witness.
I linked to that sort of thing a few weeks ago in 'off-topics'
Don't Talk to the Cops
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2664.msg95211.html#msg95211

Mr. BALL. Did you recognize anyone in the lineup?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. You did not? Did you see anybody--I have asked you that question before did you recognize anybody from their face?
Mrs. MARKHAM. From their face, no.
Mr. BALL. Did you identify anybody in these four people?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I didn't know nobody.
Mr. BALL. I know you didn't know anybody, but did anybody in that lineup look like anybody you had seen before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No. I had never seen none of them, none of these men.
Mr. BALL. No one of the four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No one of them.
Mr. BALL. No one of all four?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was there a number two man in there?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Number two is the one I picked.
Another example of Ball frustration and witness oddball responses

A clear case of leading the witness. Not allowed in court as it is witness manipulation!
A clear case of Ball frustration with Markham's space-cadet responses.

It is amazing just how clueless you truly are
Its amazing how dependant you seem be on ad-homs.

Btw, in your previous post (before you edited it again) you falsely claimed about Markham that she said "the Tippit thing happened at around 4pm" and that she wasn't interested in time;
My saying 'the Tippit thing' should a clue that I didn't actually quote her.

In this post your have exposed yourself as a liar, as she was actually talking about the line up being at 4pm and it is fully understandable that she wasn't interested in the time, at that moment, having seen a man being shot earlier that day.
In this post I have exposed myself as seeing the line 'what time did you see the man in the lineup' either as:
1) what time did you see the man during the lineup
2) what time did you see the man, in the lineup, at the scene.

Why do you want to be taken seriously, when you misrepresent evidence or refuse to even present any to back up your bogus claims?
I have no need to be taken seriously by you lot.