The Bus Stop Farce

[Martin Weidmann]

And 'round and 'round we you go. Stop stepping on your own tongue: Read your own post#476

FFS

Well, when you are having difficulty understanding it the first time, all I can do is try to explain it to you again and again and again

[Gerry Down]

And there are those pesky accounts that you haven't mentioned, like the FBI interview where Dr Liguori says he declared Tippit DOA at 1:25 (and it's helpful to realize that "time of death" is not necessarily the same as "time declared dead.") What you've done is to try and center everything around up Markham's 1:06 estimate in order to show that the DPD recording is an anomaly, when the same data can just as easily be used to argue that the Markham timeline is actual outlier by starting with a different time stamp.

I hadn't heard of this FBI report before. This changes things and undermines Helen Markhams account, though not entirely.

[Martin Weidmann]

I hadn't heard of this FBI report before. This changes things and undermines Helen Markhams account, though not entirely.

No it doesn't change a damned thing. The FBI 302 reports are internal documents that are not necessarily 100% correct. In this particular document, a 302 written by FBI agent Robert Lish, it's easy to see that the time (and only the time) was altered to 1.25 over the time that was originally written. I'm sure somebody will be able to post the document here.

Whatever a FBI agent writes in a 302 report is never seen by the witness, nor is it signed by that witness. It's an internal communication document. It's not evidence and it is never used as such. All it really shows is that the FBI did all it could to push back the time of Tippit's murder as much as possible.

[Bill Chapman]

Well, when you are having difficulty understanding it the first time, all I can do is try to explain it to you again and again and again

An affidavit is not a full testimony. Period. Full stop.

[Martin Weidmann]

An affidavit is not a full testimony. Period. Full stop.

So what? Full testimony is very often not really full testimony either.

But let's try this again; the shirt and the hole in the sleeve are not mentioned in Bledsoe's affidavit.

So, what do you think caused the investigators to bring Oswald's arrest shirt (and not his trousers or anything else) to Bledsoe's house prior to her testimony? Can you provide a good reason for that?

[Bill Chapman]

Let's try this again; the shirt and the hole in the sleeve are not mentioned in Bledsoe's affidavit.

So, what do you think caused the investigators to bring Oswald's arrest shirt to Bledsoe's house prior to her testimony? Can you provide a good reason for that?

The shirt and the hole in the sleeve are not mentioned in Bledsoe's affidavit
>>> Neither were his shoes.

So, what do you think caused the investigators to bring Oswald's arrest shirt to Bledsoe's house prior to her testimony? Can you provide a good reason for that?
>>> Because she hadn't mentioned it in her shorthand version of her later full testimony. Btw, materials used to refresh recollection are admissible as evidence.

[Martin Weidmann]

The shirt and the hole in the sleeve are not mentioned in Bledsoe's affidavit
>>> Neither were his shoes.

Irrelevant

So, what do you think caused the investigators to bring Oswald's arrest shirt to Bledsoe's house prior to her testimony? Can you provide a good reason for that?
>>> Because she hadn't mentioned it in her shorthand version of her later full testimony. Btw, materials used to refresh recollection are admissible as evidence.

You are not making sense. If you mean by "shorthand version" her affidavit, she had indeed not mentioned it. So, what reason did they have to assume that the shirt, and nothing else, could refresh her recollection?

And yes, materials used to refresh recollection are admissible at trial, in some cases, but witness manipulation or influencing prior to testimony is a criminal offence.

So, let's try it again, but in a perhaps easier way for you to understand; if I don't tell you about seeing a shirt, what reason would you have to come to my house to show me a shirt and ask me if I recognize it?

[Walt Cakebread]

How did Mrs Bledsoe see a hole in the elbow of the shirt when Oswald was wearing a jacket?

Good question, Ray.      And another question...How did Mrs Bledsoe see Lee On Mc Watter's bus when Mc Watters said that he was in Oakcliff at about 12:45.     Mrs Bledsoe said that the bus she was on passed through the intersection of Elm & Houston AFTER 1:00pm.   Bledsoe said that she was in the first "car" ( as in street car) to pass through the intersection after the shooting...She said that she saw the yellow barricade tape that had been erected around the crime scene, and she looked up to sixth floor to where the shooting had happened.......   

Fact:.... The yellow barricade tape was not erected until after 1:00pm.