Poll claims Oswald seen as ......

[Martin Weidmann]

Here we go.  Round and round down the rabbit hole. You have gone on and on and on for weeks insisting that Oswald could not have come down the stairs from the 6th floor unnoticed after the assassination. And that there is no evidence he was on the 6th floor or pulled the trigger.  So maybe reconcile those claims with how you have not concluded that Oswald is innocent.  If he wasn't on the 6th floor and couldn't reach the lunchroom unnoticed from the 6th floor as you have claimed endlessly that rules him out as the assassin.  Good grief.

You have gone on and on and on for weeks insisting that Oswald could not have come down the stairs from the 6th floor unnoticed after the assassination.

More dishonesty. For weeks I have been asking you how he could have come down the stairs unnoticed and to this day I still have no answer

And that there is no evidence he was on the 6th floor or pulled the trigger.

There isn't and you haven't been able to produce any, despite a multitude of requests to do so.

So maybe reconcile those claims with how you have not concluded that Oswald is innocent.

You seem very confused. Asking for evidence of his guilt (you claim there is, but never produce) isn't the same as concluding that he is innocent.

If he wasn't on the 6th floor and couldn't reach the lunchroom unnoticed from the 6th floor as you have claimed endlessly that rules him out as the assassin.

Except that I have never claimed he wasn't on the 6th floor nor that he couldn't reach the lunchroom unnoticed. That's just another one of your strawman.

Good grief.

Indeed. But let's try this again.... baby steps... Oswald may or may not have been on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 on 11/22/63. You don't know if he was and neither do I. So, for you to claim that he was, you just don't get to assume that he was. You need to provide evidence for it and the simple truth of the matter is that you haven't got any.

The same goes for reaching the lunchroom unnoticed. He may well have, but the evidence we now have speaks against it. So, again, you are going to have to explain how he managed to do that and so far you haven't been able to do the either.

This is most likely falling on deaf ears, but you should really try to listen and understand what somebody is actually saying instead of dismissing it outright and later making up an alternative version of what they said.

[Richard Smith]

You have gone on and on and on for weeks insisting that Oswald could not have come down the stairs from the 6th floor unnoticed after the assassination.

More dishonesty. For weeks I have been asking you how he could have come down the stairs unnoticed and to this day I still have no answer

And that there is no evidence he was on the 6th floor or pulled the trigger.

There isn't and you haven't been able to produce any, despite a multitude of requests to do so.

So maybe reconcile those claims with how you have not concluded that Oswald is innocent.

You seem very confused. Asking for evidence of his guilt (you claim there is, but never produce) isn't the same as concluding that he is innocent.

If he wasn't on the 6th floor and couldn't reach the lunchroom unnoticed from the 6th floor as you have claimed endlessly that rules him out as the assassin.

Except that I have never claimed he wasn't on the 6th floor nor that he couldn't reach the lunchroom unnoticed. That's just another one of your strawman.

Good grief.

Indeed. But let's try this again.... baby steps... Oswald may or may not have been on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 on 11/22/63. You don't know if he was and neither do I. So, for you to claim that he was, you just don't get to assume that he was. You need to provide evidence for it and the simple truth of the matter is that you haven't got any.

The same goes for reaching the lunchroom unnoticed. He may well have, but the evidence we now have speaks against it. So, again, you are going to have to explain how he managed to do that and so far you haven't been able to do the either.

This is most likely falling on deaf ears, but you should really try to listen and understand what somebody is actually saying instead of dismissing it outright and later making up an alternative version of what they said.

So many words.  If you don't believe Oswald could have escaped the 6th floor unnoticed (as you have stated repeatedly as though a fact) then he obviously could not be the assassin.  Why is it so difficult for you to have the courage of your convictions instead of playing these games where you claim something is a fact but then deny the implications of your own claim?  It is embarrassing.  Even the most deranged JFK conspiracy theory is more worthy of respect than this cowardly defense attorney nonsense.  You are like Inspector Clouseau who suspected everyone and suspected no one.  It's all the more laughable that you take yourself so seriously with this approach. 

The assassination took place at 12:30. Oswald was encountered in the lunchroom approximately 75 seconds later according to Martin.  In order to reach the lunchroom as the assassin, Oswald would have to descend from the 6th floor to the lunchroom in that timeframe.  Here is what Martin has said on the subject:

"If Oswald had come down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots, he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor.
She heard Adams and Styles going down on the stairs and saw Baker and Truly come up. Somewhere inbetween these two events Oswald would have be passing the 4th floor. The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs."

[Martin Weidmann]

So many words.  If you don't believe Oswald could have escaped the 6th floor unnoticed (as you have stated repeatedly as though a fact) then he obviously could not be the assassin.  Why is it so difficult for you to have the courage of your convictions instead of playing these games where you claim something is a fact but then deny the implications of your own claim?  It is embarrassing.  Even the most deranged JFK conspiracy theory is more worthy of respect than this cowardly defense attorney nonsense.  You are like Inspector Clouseau who suspected everyone and suspected no one.  It's all the more laughable that you take yourself so seriously with this approach.

So many words.

You're a complete waste of time and oxygen. You are so damned arrogant that you actually think that your opinion is always the right one and, as a consequence, you don't need to pay any attention to what others say. You can always make up stuff as you go, right?

Btw, what is this "so many words" crap anyway? I've seen you use it time after time. Is it to signal that your brain has such a limited capacity that it can only process a certain (small) number of words in one go?

If you don't believe Oswald could have escaped the 6th floor unnoticed (as you have stated repeatedly as though a fact) then he obviously could not be the assassin.

Again, when did I ever claim that, "as though a fact"? This is what you get when you are so convinced of your own belief that you simply don't pay attention to what others actually say. Obviously, this lie is just another distraction to draw attention away from the fact that you can not explain how he could have done it. It's the strategy of a loser.

You claimed that Oswald could have gone down the stairs unnoticed. I've asked you for the evidence for that claim a thousand times by now. Where is? And if you haven't got it, just be honest for once and admit it, instead of desperately trying to turn the argument around.

Why is it so difficult for you to have the courage of your convictions instead of playing these games where you claim something is a fact but then deny the implications of your own claim?  It is embarrassing.

You mean the courage of my convictions as you (utterly mistaken and dishonestly) feel they should be. The only one making claims is you. According to you Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 on 11/22/63 (claim one), he was in the sn as the shooter who killed Kennedy (claim 2) and he managed to get downstairs unnoticed (claim 3). The implications of those claims are that you need to present evidence for them and, oh what a surprise, you haven't got any. So, deflection is the game. It's pathethic.

[Martin Weidmann]

The assassination took place at 12:30. Oswald was encountered in the lunchroom approximately 75 seconds later according to Martin.  In order to reach the lunchroom as the assassin, Oswald would have to descend from the 6th floor to the lunchroom in that timeframe.  Here is what Martin has said on the subject:

"If Oswald had come down the stairs within 75 seconds after the shots, he would have been seen by Dorothy Garner, who was standing next to the stairs on the 4th floor. She heard Adams and Styles going down on the stairs and saw Baker and Truly come up. Somewhere inbetween these two events Oswald would have be passing the 4th floor. The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs."

The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs."

It's a logical conclusion based on the known facts. If you disagree, feel free to prove me wrong   

[John Iacoletti]

This is most likely falling on deaf ears, but you should really try to listen and understand what somebody is actually saying instead of dismissing it outright and later making up an alternative version of what they said.

"Richard" isn't interested in what anybody else has to say -- he's regurgitating from a script.

[Jerry Freeman]

...and thinks Oswald has an alibi for the moment of the assassination. 

Oswald does have an alibi...he just can't give us one right now.

  The reason Garner did not see him is simple; he didn't come down the stairs."

Agree. Oswald did not come down the stairs.

[Bill Chapman]

CTers/JAQers/OAKers want to muffle those who have become thorns in their sides
Talk about cowardice. I call it dictatorship:
-----------------
BONUS MAXIM
-----------------
'Defanging public discourse ultimately
places the nightstick in the hand of the
oppressor. The dictator demands a
timid populace’  ~ William J Chapman

[Bill Chapman]

"Richard" isn't interested in what anybody else has to say -- he's regurgitating from a script.

Says the 'Little Dictator'