Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[John Iacoletti]

Let's get a grip, this is 1963 and people either said about/approximately/around either 1 or 1:30 which works out to a mean time of 1:15.
Scoggins who was on lunch and was due back at work would have been clock watching and Scoggins said about 1:20.

And Markham and Bowley who both had reasons to "clock watch" both put the shooting earlier than the narrative.  Let's face it, you guys use whatever times you think will support your story.  Besides, how the hell would Scoggins know what time a man was walking near the Texaco station?

[John Iacoletti]

The eyewitnesses who positively identified Oswald and confirmed he was carrying a gun

No matter how many times you regurgitate this claptrap, unfair and biased lineups are still unreliable.  And "carrying a gun" doesn't prove that you just murdered somebody anyway.

[John Iacoletti]

Or... and I know this is a stretch for you, but bare with me...

What, you want me to get naked?

Mary Brock saw Oswald walk past her around 1:20 since we know Reynolds and Patterson followed Oswald to that point...

That's not what you said.  You said they saw him "somewhere around the Texaco station".

and Reynolds and Patterson could not have been following Oswald for more then a couple minutes as it's only one block from Patton & Jefferson (Reynolds' and Patterson's location at the time of the shooting) to the Texaco station.

Another assumption.  Reynolds and Patterson saw a guy coming down Patton Street.  They didn't know where he came from or how long it took him to get there.

It's painfully obvious that the time approximation of 1:30 is just that, an approximation.  You can take it literal if you wish, but that shows that either you don't have a clue about the witnesses and timelines or your dishonest and not interested in the truth.

What it shows is that you'll make up whatever times you think will support your narrative.

How about this... Explain how the man could literally walk past Mary Brock as late as 1:30  if it's the same man who Reynolds and Patterson were following once they saw him run down Patton from the direction of the shooting.  We're talking about a parking lot located two blocks from the shooting scene.  1:30?  How does that work?

That was my question.  How does that work?  I'm not sure it was the same man.  Mary Brock's husband wasn't so sure.

Isn't it time to start being honest?

Yes, I think you should be.

[Walt Cakebread]

Or... and I know this is a stretch for you, but bare with me... Mary Brock saw Oswald walk past her around 1:20 since we know Reynolds and Patterson followed Oswald to that point... and Reynolds and Patterson could not have been following Oswald for more then a couple minutes as it's only one block from Patton & Jefferson (Reynolds' and Patterson's location at the time of the shooting) to the Texaco station.

It's painfully obvious that the time approximation of 1:30 is just that, an approximation.  You can take it literal if you wish, but that shows that either you don't have a clue about the witnesses and timelines or your dishonest and not interested in the truth.

If you were really interested in the truth, you'd understand this.  But, you're not interested in the truth.

How about this... Explain how the man could literally walk past Mary Brock as late as 1:30  if it's the same man who Reynolds and Patterson were following once they saw him run down Patton from the direction of the shooting.  We're talking about a parking lot located two blocks from the shooting scene.  1:30?  How does that work?

Isn't it time to start being honest?

Isn't it time to start being honest?

Good Idea, Billy Bob,.....   To thine self be true......

[Martin Weidmann]

Let's get a grip, this is 1963 and people either said about/approximately/around either 1 or 1:30 which works out to a mean time of 1:15.
Scoggins who was on lunch and was due back at work would have been clock watching and Scoggins said about 1:20.

JohnM

Scoggins who was on lunch and was due back at work would have been clock watching and Scoggins said about 1:20.


Markham had to take the bus to work and would have been clock watching and Markham said about 1:06

Bowley had to pick up his daughter from school and his wife from work and would have been clock watching and Bowley said 1:10


Btw... Scoggins' timeline shows he was at least 10 minutes off in his estimates, as he would have arrived at the corner of 10th/Patton at least ten minutes earlier (after dropping off his last ride near by) than he said.

[Walt Cakebread]

Scoggins who was on lunch and was due back at work would have been clock watching and Scoggins said about 1:20.


Markham had to take the bus to work and would have been clock watching and Markham said about 1:06

Bowley had to pick up his daughter from school and his wife from work and would have been clock watching and Bowley said 1:10


Btw... Scoggins' timeline shows he was at least 10 minutes off in his estimates, as he would have arrived at the corner of 10th/Patton at least ten minutes earlier (after dropping off his last ride near by) than he said.

Markham had to take the bus to work and would have been clock watching and Markham said about 1:06

Bowley had to pick up his daughter from school and his wife from work and would have been clock watching and Bowley said 1:10

You're right...      Markham, Bowley, and Benavides all verify the time of the shooting as about 1:06 .....The liars who framed an innocent man, desperately try to set the clock ahead and attempt to make the time of the murder as about 1:16.    But all of the three ( Markham, Bowley, Benavides) witnesses KNEW the approximate ( within a minute) time of the event....   And none placed the time as late as 1:16.

[Jerry Freeman]

You clearly have no idea what constitutes a positive identification...

Trying to battle wits there with someone that's totally disarmed.

[John Mytton]

Trying to battle wits...

Exactly, he tried and failed and he's your role model?





JohnM