(43) Oswald's tan jacket was found along the path Tippit's killer
took.
This was *NEVER* established as Oswald's. Indeed, we DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHO FOUND THIS JACKET.
That's a pretty huge gap in the chain of custody... and certainly
can't be used to 'prove' Oswald's guilt when you cannot even establish
who found it, or who owns it.
Watch, as EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER absolutely REFUSES to refute what I
just pointed out by citing evidence.
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 4:04:22?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
(43) Oswald's tan jacket was found along the path Tippit's killer
took.
This was *NEVER* established as Oswald's. Indeed, we DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHO FOUND THIS JACKET.
That's a pretty huge gap in the chain of custody... and certainly
can't be used to 'prove' Oswald's guilt when you cannot even establish
who found it, or who owns it.
Watch, as EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER absolutely REFUSES to refute what I
just pointed out by citing evidence.
Neither one of the Davises, nor Markham, nor Benavides, nor Callaway, nor Scoggins positively identified CE 162 as the jacket Tippit's killer wore.
Officer JM Poe took the descriptions of the killer from Helen Markham and the Davises. He testified that, Mrs. Markham was the first to describe the jacket as white and one of the Davises corroborated that description.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0039a.htm
The Dallas Police radio broadcast of the discovery of the jacket was made by motorcycle officer JT Griffin ( 279 ).
Griffin described the jacket they found as a WHITE jacket.
"Got a white jacket......he had a white jacket on......we believe this is it." >https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0219a.htm
Officer TA Hutson was 25 yards away from the jacket when found.
He testified that , "a white jacket was picked up by another officer....the original description was that he was wearing a white jacket...It looked like a white cloth jacket to me."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0019b.htm
Sgt. Calvin Bud Owens testified that police were informed by a man that, " the suspect that shot officer Tippit had run across a vacant lot toward Jefferson and thrown down his jacket, I think he said white, I'm not sure."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0044a.htm
There's too much corroboration here for the killer's jacket being white and no evidence that it was anything but white.
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 4:04:22 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
(43) Oswald's tan jacket was found along the path Tippit's killer
took.
This was *NEVER* established as Oswald's. Indeed, we DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHO FOUND THIS JACKET.
That's a pretty huge gap in the chain of custody... and certainly
can't be used to 'prove' Oswald's guilt when you cannot even establish
who found it, or who owns it.
Watch, as EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER absolutely REFUSES to refute what INeither one of the Davises, nor Markham, nor Benavides, nor Callaway, nor Scoggins positively identified CE 162 as the jacket Tippit's killer wore.
just pointed out by citing evidence.
Officer JM Poe took the descriptions of the killer from Helen Markham and the Davises. He testified that, Mrs. Markham was the first to describe the jacket as white and one of the Davises corroborated that description.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0039a.htm
The Dallas Police radio broadcast of the discovery of the jacket was made by motorcycle officer JT Griffin ( 279 ).
Griffin described the jacket they found as a WHITE jacket.
"Got a white jacket......he had a white jacket on......we believe this is it."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0219a.htm
Officer TA Hutson was 25 yards away from the jacket when found.
He testified that , "a white jacket was picked up by another officer....the original description was that he was wearing a white jacket...It looked like a white cloth jacket to me."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0019b.htm
Sgt. Calvin Bud Owens testified that police were informed by a man that, " the suspect that shot officer Tippit had run across a vacant lot toward Jefferson and thrown down his jacket, I think he said white, I'm not sure."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0044a.htm
There's too much corroboration here for the killer's jacket being white and no evidence that it was anything but white.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 8:06:35?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 4:04:22?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
(43) Oswald's tan jacket was found along the path Tippit's killerNeither one of the Davises, nor Markham, nor Benavides, nor Callaway, nor Scoggins positively identified CE 162 as the jacket Tippit's killer wore.
took.
This was *NEVER* established as Oswald's. Indeed, we DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHO FOUND THIS JACKET.
That's a pretty huge gap in the chain of custody... and certainly
can't be used to 'prove' Oswald's guilt when you cannot even establish
who found it, or who owns it.
Watch, as EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER absolutely REFUSES to refute what I
just pointed out by citing evidence.
They did ID the guy who owned the jacket.
Officer JM Poe took the descriptions of the killer from Helen Markham and the Davises. He testified that, Mrs. Markham was the first to describe the jacket as white and one of the Davises corroborated that description.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0039a.htm
The Dallas Police radio broadcast of the discovery of the jacket was made by motorcycle officer JT Griffin ( 279 ).
Griffin described the jacket they found as a WHITE jacket.
"Got a white jacket......he had a white jacket on......we believe this is it."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0219a.htm
Officer TA Hutson was 25 yards away from the jacket when found.
He testified that , "a white jacket was picked up by another officer....the original description was that he was wearing a white jacket...It looked like a white cloth jacket to me."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0019b.htm
Sgt. Calvin Bud Owens testified that police were informed by a man that, " the suspect that shot officer Tippit had run across a vacant lot toward Jefferson and thrown down his jacket, I think he said white, I'm not sure."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0044a.htm
There's too much corroboration here for the killer's jacket being white and no evidence that it was anything but white.
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw, >well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Unless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 08:12:49 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 8:06:35?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 4:04:22?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
(43) Oswald's tan jacket was found along the path Tippit's killerNeither one of the Davises, nor Markham, nor Benavides, nor Callaway, nor Scoggins positively identified CE 162 as the jacket Tippit's killer wore.
took.
This was *NEVER* established as Oswald's. Indeed, we DON'T EVEN KNOW
WHO FOUND THIS JACKET.
That's a pretty huge gap in the chain of custody... and certainly
can't be used to 'prove' Oswald's guilt when you cannot even establish >>> who found it, or who owns it.
Watch, as EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER absolutely REFUSES to refute what I
just pointed out by citing evidence.
They did ID the guy who owned the jacket.You're begging the question.
Stop using logical fallacies, and make
REAL arguments.
Officer JM Poe took the descriptions of the killer from Helen Markham and the Davises. He testified that, Mrs. Markham was the first to describe the jacket as white and one of the Davises corroborated that description.
Logical fallacy deleted.https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0039a.htm
Logical fallacy deleted.The Dallas Police radio broadcast of the discovery of the jacket was made by motorcycle officer JT Griffin ( 279 ).
Griffin described the jacket they found as a WHITE jacket.
"Got a white jacket......he had a white jacket on......we believe this is it."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0219a.htm
When are you going to learn that logical fallacies can't convince
anyone?
Yet another logical fallacy deleted.Officer TA Hutson was 25 yards away from the jacket when found.
He testified that , "a white jacket was picked up by another officer....the original description was that he was wearing a white jacket...It looked like a white cloth jacket to me."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0019b.htm
Sgt. Calvin Bud Owens testified that police were informed by a man that, " the suspect that shot officer Tippit had run across a vacant lot toward Jefferson and thrown down his jacket, I think he said white, I'm not sure."
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0044a.htm
There's too much corroboration here for the killer's jacket being white and no evidence that it was anything but white.
You lose.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw, well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Unless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
Unless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group
that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw, well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Unless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.Begging the question again.
Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the worldStill begging the question...
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw, >> well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification...
let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the evidence to directly debate me.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw, >>>> well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification...
let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the
evidence to directly debate me.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
You know the evidence very well
and do not accept it. Now what?
Everyone else has moved on.
The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Chuckles ran...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >>>>> Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Chuckles ran again...Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
Chuckles can't answer the OP either...And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
Chuckles refuses to help out Corbutt.that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification...
let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the
evidence to directly debate me.
Chuckles refuses to defend Corbutt.Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
You know the evidence very wellYes I do... far better that you.
and do not accept it. Now what?Stop lying.
Everyone else has moved on.Indeed... most of America agrees with me, and has moved on.
The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.Can you name this logical fallacy?
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 5:03:09 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Chuckles ran...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >>>>> Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Chuckles ran again...Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
Chuckles can't answer the OP either...And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
Chuckles refuses to help out Corbutt.that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification... >> let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the >> evidence to directly debate me.
Chuckles refuses to defend Corbutt.Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
You`d think they might be more concerned that the people who killed an American President got away with murder. Look how upset they got over a piece of shit like George Floyd.You know the evidence very wellYes I do... far better that you.
and do not accept it. Now what?Stop lying.
Everyone else has moved on.Indeed... most of America agrees with me, and has moved on.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 5:23:00 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 5:03:09 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Chuckles ran...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >>>>> Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Chuckles ran again...Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
Chuckles can't answer the OP either...And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
Chuckles refuses to help out Corbutt.that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification...
let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the
evidence to directly debate me.
Chuckles refuses to defend Corbutt.Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
Benny believes Oswald was innocent. Most of America knows he was guilty, even if they don'tYou`d think they might be more concerned that the people who killed an American President got away with murder. Look how upset they got over a piece of shit like George Floyd.You know the evidence very wellYes I do... far better that you.
and do not accept it. Now what?Stop lying.
Everyone else has moved on.Indeed... most of America agrees with me, and has moved on.
think he acted alone. The Oswald Innocent crowd are a tiny minority. You'd have to be nuts to
believe that in the face of all the evidence that he was guilty.
Benny
believes Oswald was innocent.
Most of America knows he was guilty...
even if they don't think he acted alone.
The Oswald Innocent crowd are a tiny minority.
You'd have to be nuts to
believe that in the face of all the evidence that he was guilty.
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:42:00 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
Benny
When you start with a logical fallacy, you're showing the world that
you have no evidence on your side.
believes Oswald was innocent.
Nope. Another logical fallacy...
Most of America knows he was guilty...
Then by YOUR OWN LOGIC, most of America knows it was a conspiracy.
You lose!
even if they don't think he acted alone.Sorry moron... if they "know" that Oswald was guilty, then they
equally *KNOW* that it was a conspiracy.
It's not *YOUR* option to change the wording like this.
The Oswald Innocent crowd are a tiny minority.Those well-informed on the evidence in this case are a tiny minority.
You'd have to be nuts toWHAT EVIDENCE????
believe that in the face of all the evidence that he was guilty.
YOU REPEATEDLY REFUSE TO CITE ANYTHING AT ALL!!!
You just keep telling this same lie, and refusing to cite the evidence
you claim exists.
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Chuckles ran...
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >>>>> Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Chuckles ran again...Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
Chuckles can't answer the OP either...And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
Chuckles refuses to help out Corbutt.that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification...
let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the
evidence to directly debate me.
Chuckles refuses to defend Corbutt.Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
You know the evidence very wellYes I do... far better that you.
and do not accept it. Now what?Stop lying.
Everyone else has moved on.Indeed... most of America agrees with me, and has moved on.
The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
Can you name this logical fallacy?
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ? https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 7:42:33 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ? https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htmExplain how any of this is an indication the DPD believed someone other than Oswald killed
Tippit. Just another example of a conspiracy hobbyist coming across something they don't
know the answer to so they just assume it is evidence that supports their silly beliefs without
ever explaining how.
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.That's because you have very poor analytical skills.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 8:42:18 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< bullshit comments deleted >
Your comments LOSE every time to my evidence.
That's because you're a LOSER.
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 8:42:18 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< bullshit comments deleted >
Your comments LOSE every time to my evidence.
That's because you're a LOSER.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ? https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
< bullshit comments deleted >
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 9:13:22 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
And when you're dead you'll have left the world NOTHING but a record of your stupid comments.< bullshit comments deleted >
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 9:13:22 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
And when you're dead you'll have left the world NOTHING but a record of your stupid comments.< bullshit comments deleted >
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 8:42:18 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< bullshit comments deleted >
Your comments LOSE every time to my evidence.
That's because you're a LOSER.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:03:09?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 3:08:10?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 12:48:33 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote: >>>>>>> Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.
They ID'd him from a group
That's all that was needed.
Begging the question again.
Chuckles ran...
Now tell us how they could have IDed the guy who was arrested with the only gun in the world
that could have fired the shells thee shooter left at the scene if they had IDed the wrong guy.
Still begging the question...
Chuckles ran again...
And of course, this has *NOTHING* to do with the OP.
Chuckles can't answer the OP either...
that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
Still trying...
To point out facts? Clearly, yes.
Are you still running from them? Clearly, yes.
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
It was not the only identification...
Again, not the topic.
But go ahead coward... quote AND CITE your very best identification... >>>> let's see what you have.
But you won't, of course... you've figured out that you don't have the >>>> evidence to directly debate me.
Chuckles refuses to help out Corbutt.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Gil is making up his own rules of evidence again.
And you're lying, as usual...
Chuckles refuses to defend Corbutt.
Logical fallacy deleted. You can't convince anyone with logicalUnless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
fallacies... you need evidence.
WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE???
You know the evidence very well
Yes I do... far better that you.
and do not accept it. Now what?Stop lying.
Everyone else has moved on.Indeed... most of America agrees with me, and has moved on.
The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
Can you name this logical fallacy?
The logical fallacy of noting the DPD isn't looking for Tippit's
killer because it's considered a closed case?
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 8:57:04?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 8:42:18?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
< bullshit comments deleted >
Your comments LOSE every time to my evidence.
That's because you're a LOSER.
Typically, when faced with a challenge you can't meet...
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 7:42:33?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Good of you to provide the testimony that shows you are lying.
Boggs: "In that connection--How many bullets were recovered?
Eisenberg: "Four were recovered from the officer`s body."
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ?
Why did they send them at all is a better question. The DPD should have been handling the Tippit murder.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
And this is why they don`t tap idiots to conduct investigations.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ? >https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 06:03:07 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 7:42:33?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:18:00?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
If the DPD wasn't looking for Tippit's killer and it was a closed case, then why did they retain three of the bullets removed from Tippit's body
Everyone else has moved on. The DPD isn't looking for Tippit's killer, Ben. It's a closed case.
instead of sending them along with the other evidence to the FBI on November 27th ?
Why did they tell the FBI that CE 602, the single bullet they sent on November 27th, was, "the only bullet that was recovered" ?
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Good of you to provide the testimony that shows you are lying.
Boggs: "In that connection--How many bullets were recovered?
Eisenberg: "Four were recovered from the officer`s body."You can't find a more blatant liar than Chickenshit. I invite all
lurkers to click on the above link, and read the following:
Mr. Cunningham. Well, it is my understanding the first bullet was
turned over to the FBI office in Dallas by the Dallas Police
Department. They reportedly said this was the only bullet that was recovered, or that they had.
When Gil made his statement, HE QUOTED ACCURATELY THE SENTENCE YOU
CLAIM IS A LIE.
Watch folks, as Chickenshit will **NEVER** retract his blatant lie.
And no other believer will correct him on his lie either...
Why did they withhold those three bullets until March 16, 1964 ?
Why did they send them at all is a better question. The DPD should have been handling the Tippit murder.You have no explanation for this...
We do.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0241b.htm
Seems to me that they withheld evidence because they were still looking for the Tippit killer.
And this is why they don`t tap idiots to conduct investigations.Blatant lying, logical fallacies? Is this all you have?
Clearly...
You lose.
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 1:08:44?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 11:12:53?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Why are you focusing on the jacket when the witnesses IDed Oswald as the shooter.They ID'd him from a group that included three blonds, a short heavy jail clerk, a detective who was 32 years old,
two teenagers and a Mexican.
You don`t understand line-ups.
Now tell us who the fuck was the witness that described Tippit's killer as any of the above ?
And the witnesses who said that Oswald "most resembled" the man they saw,
well, I hate to burst your bubble Einstein, but that is NOT a positive identification.
Even whacko Helen Markham admitted that she never saw Oswald prior to the lineup.
This is how you dishonestly look at the evidence. It shows you are playing games and have interest in the truth.
Geesh.
Here's another clue for you: if you can't identify the killer's clothes, you can't identify the killer.
Unless you can show that Oswald was either wearing a white jacket or changed jackets after he shot Tippit, as Ben says, "You lose".
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 116:29:36 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,181 |