Brown/Weidmann, Mini-Debate?

[John Iacoletti]

Hutson said the lights were on, but it was dark in the theater. Brewer didn’t say anything different.

[Bill Chapman]

No need for any sort of contact with you at all,

Then don't ask me questions

when you try to insult me

I wouldn't have to try very hard, but in this case I didn't try at all.

It is not my problem that you are so desperate as to believe that what I say or not has anything to do with you, when the truth is that you are completely insignificant to me.

And yet here you are
Moth to the flame

[Bill Chapman]

Hutson said the lights were on, but it was dark in the theater. Brewer didn’t say anything different.

FFS

Brewer said he saw the man with a gun
Another guy said 'he's got a gun'

[Richard Smith]

Witnesses confirm a revolver was taken from Oswald.  Oswald admits he had a gun.  There are images of the revolver being carried out of the TT.  Documents that preexist this event link an order and shipment of the revolver per the same serial number to Oswald's PO Box in an alias associated with Oswald.  No other pistol associated with Oswald is ever found.  But the contrarians shout "chain of custody" over and over.  Did the DPD have a time machine to create documents that confirm this revolver was sent to Oswald?

[Bill Chapman]

Maybe someone can find the pantry that was used to go back to 1959 in Stephen King's '11.22.63'

Aside from that, I wonder if Iacoletti would care to let us know just how dark it was in the TT for
A) Hutson
B) Brewer
C) The 'he's got a gun' guy


To see or not to see

[John Iacoletti]

FFS

Brewer said he saw the man with a gun
Another guy said 'he's got a gun'

The question is, did he have a gun before McDonald accosted him? We only have McDonald’s say-so on that. A known attention-seeking, self-promoting, serial embellisher who needed to justify his own misconduct.

A lot of people’s hands were on a gun during the struggle. Only Brewer (again, across a darkened theater) claimed to see one in Oswald’s hand. McDonald didn’t even say that.

“Another guy”. LOL.

[John Iacoletti]

Witnesses confirm a revolver was taken from Oswald.

  What witnesses?

Oswald admits he had a gun. 

  You don’t know what he “admitted”.

There are images of the revolver being carried out of the TT. 

  You don’t know which revolver is in the images.

Documents that preexist this event link an order

  You don’t know when the “documents” were created.

and shipment of the revolver per the same serial number to Oswald's PO Box

  You have no evidence of any such shipment.

But the contrarians shout "chain of custody" over and over.

You don’t understand why chain of custody matters. Without it, you can’t demonstrate that CE143 was the same gun handled by McDonald, Carroll, or Hill, or that it was ever in Oswald’s possession, much less had anything to do with Tippit. Wanting to believe it is not sufficient.

[Martin Weidmann]

What witnesses?

  You don’t know what he “admitted”.

  You don’t know which revolver is in the images.

  You don’t know when the “documents” were created.

  You have no evidence of any such shipment.

You don’t understand why chain of custody matters. Without it, you can’t demonstrate that CE143 was the same gun handled by McDonald, Carroll, or Hill, or that it was ever in Oswald’s possession, much less had anything to do with Tippit. Wanting to believe it is not sufficient.

You know what's going to happen, right?

"Richard Smith" is going to completely ignore everything you have written and repeat the same old BS over and over again, in much the same way as Bill Brown did earlier in this thread.

The only take away from this is that it is pointless to ask a LN a question about the evidence, because he simply can't provide a plausible answer.