Why did Oswald go to the movies?

[John Iacoletti]

The definition of 'looking funny' you are applying here.

Are you asking me what Brewer meant by "looked funny"?

I don't fancy myself a mind reader like your buddy "Richard".  Get on your Ouija board and ask Brewer what he meant.  Personally I don't think it matters.  I want to know what evidence made the man that Brewer thought looked funny a suspect.

[John Iacoletti]

You mean like you telling us what witnesses saw?and didn't see? in the TT? Got it.

Nope I just point out all of the contradictory accounts about what happened.  That's enough.

[Richard Smith]

This is very simple.  If you are not alleging that Brewer was acting for nefarious reasons, then what is the purpose of questioning his motives for finding Oswald suspicious?  Even if you believe his suspicion was unfounded, why does it matter?  If Brewer thought Oswald was acting suspiciously (even if he was not) it doesn't change the narrative one iota.  Brewer believed - rightly or wrongly - that Oswald was suspicious and that ultimately led to the chain of events resulting in his arrest.  So what?

[Richard Smith]

John I is mixing apples and oranges.  The facts are that Brewer found Oswald to be suspicious.  Whether that suspicion was reasonable or not doesn't matter.  The fact is that the DPD received a call reporting a suspicious person in the vicinity of a murder.  They had no choice but to respond as though this MIGHT be their murder suspect.  He might have turned out not to be the guy.  Like the guy at the library.  Instead he starts a fight and pulls a gun.  Why that is so difficult to comprehend is inexplicable. 

[John Iacoletti]

This is very simple.  If you are not alleging that Brewer was acting for nefarious reasons, then what is the purpose of questioning his motives for finding Oswald suspicious?

I don't recall questioning his motives, but I'm sure you'll either cite it if I did, or admit that you are mistaken.

Who am I kidding?  You never admit it when you just blatantly make stuff up.

I do wonder what's so suspicious about looking in a shoe store window and what he did that was interpreted as "acting scared".  Brewer never really elaborated.

[Bill Chapman]

Just you, Saint Logical Fallacy.  And your other irrational brethren who think that's evidence for murder.

Why present a logical argument with evidence when you can just be sarcastic and insulting instead?

'And your other irrational brethren who think that's evidence for murder.'

Not in and of itself. You refuse to acknowledge that. You are making yourself look a troll, nothing else. You're alarmingly desperate; worse than you've ever been IMO. You and your brethren are living in The Land of Irrationality. 

[John Iacoletti]

They had no choice but to respond as though this MIGHT be their murder suspect.  He might have turned out not to be the guy.  Like the guy at the library.  Instead he starts a fight and pulls a gun.

I think you're confusing your baseless claims with evidence again.  And how exactly did they determine within minutes that the guy at the library was "not the guy"?

[John Iacoletti]

Not in and of itself. You refuse to acknowledge that. You are making yourself look a troll, nothing else. You're alarmingly desperate;

Somebody thinks that supposedly "not being interested in what happened" is evidence of murder, and I'm the one who's desperate?  Please.