Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogationsBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TO
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT
their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.
Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on himwith an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogationsBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TO
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with.
All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else.
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Vestibule window...Both Fritz and Baker knew that Oswald was in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the shots, which is the true and accurate explanation for their "stuttering"..."Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
Parker stupidly fails to appreciate the real reason for Fritz's stuttering...Fritz was having trouble forming words to describe Oswald's location, just like Baker was having the exact same trouble explaining exactly how he detected Oswald in the
We know Fritz wasn't lying about the Lunch Room Encounter because Fritz was the one who told of Oswald's true location in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room to the Commission...Any fool would realize the easily detectable stuttering Fritz was showing whenexplaining this was due to his knowledge that Oswald was in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the shots...
Greg is a troll...He has such a strong group of assholes supporting him that no one ever gets around to pointing-out the obvious stuttering Greg himself does when trying to avoid Hosty's admission to Nigel Turner that Oswald told them he was alone inthe Lunch Room during the assassination...Any fool can see Parker, Kamp, and the Prayer Man idiots avoiding discussing that...The main asshole Gordon never explains why he is keeping that from being discussed on his website...
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on him
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT
their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.As Greg Parker has already said, he only believes his own arguments because he thinks Prayer Man is Oswald. Otherwise he would be a Nutter.
So every argument Parker makes presupposes Oswald's innocence. Oswald is not innocent because the 2nd floor encounter "didn't happen." The 2nd floor encounter didn't happen because Oswald is innocent. This is Parker Logic.
To me it seems reasonable that Baker might have a confused memory of which floor it was on, not being familiar with the building
and by Garner, for whom Parker requires Lumpkin to be in uniform, which he wasn't.
The US government, apparently, is more trustworthy than the Dallas Police.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 4:02:53 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
So that takes out the need to have Truly show him the way.Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
When you do not know the facts, you are not entitled to just make them up as you have hear. The evidence precludes the 2nd floor encounter, not me.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.As Greg Parker has already said, he only believes his own arguments because he thinks Prayer Man is Oswald. Otherwise he would be a Nutter.
So every argument Parker makes presupposes Oswald's innocence. Oswald is not innocent because the 2nd floor encounter "didn't happen." The 2nd floor encounter didn't happen because Oswald is innocent. This is Parker Logic.
To me it seems reasonable that Baker might have a confused memory of which floor it was on, not being familiar with the buildingYep. There it is. That was the Nutter argument when I first raised this 20 years ago. It hasn't aged well.
Baker was not interested in floor plans. He wanted to get to the top of the building. I could get a 5 year old to find his or her way to the top of any building. Not hard. Stick to the stairs till you can't go any further. Not even Baker was that dumb.
His memory failure is another bullshit Nutter argument. Most office buildings of the era have the same type stairs. You go up some stairs, reach a landing, then go up another flight. That constitutes one floor. Not hard to do the math on which flooryou were on and not hard to tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Typical stairs of the era covering a single floor https://inspectapedia.com/Stairs/Stair-Landing-Dimensions.jpgshow was stationed at the door confirming those leaving were employees? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly who then reported Oswald as missing? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly whose wife was a cousin to the founder of the Flying
He would have to have been from outer space to run up 4 flights of stairs and think that equaled the number of floors he covered.
His actions are confirmed by Truly,
Roy Sansom Truly? Cousin to Fred Korth's wife and the lawyer whose office Oswald attended to have his manuscript typed up? The Roy Sansom Truly who hired Oswald despite not needing him? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly who official records
fabrication by Garner or the person who wrote it. Let's face it, the bullshit story needed all the support it could coerce.and by Garner, for whom Parker requires Lumpkin to be in uniform, which he wasn't.The problems with Garner include that she never personally confirmed or signed off on what was written. There was at least one witness who said Truly never left the first floor. If she did not see Truly and Lumpkin going up, then the story is simply a
Truly might not be a reliable witness, but there's no reason to think that he was in cahoots with Baker.he just wants to reopen the case, whatever that means. He doesn't want to prove the case, he just wants to tell the US government to have another go at it.
Absolutely. Baker was kept away from EVERYONE until he got his head right on what happened.
Truly must tell the truth because of Baker being present. But since Parker knows that the fuzzy old lady in the doorway is Oswald, he must call Baker a liar. Parker Logic demands it. It's hard to believe that Parker believes his own argument here. But
Listen Fuckface McGee or whatever name you use these days... Parker has the guts to put his name to what he claims. He uses actual evidence to support his claims. Much of that evidence was either found by Parker, or by others following Parker's leadsand generating their own further leads. You can claim all you want that I started with a conclusion, but my posting history shows otherwise. Making up bullshit that suits you, is your domain. You are doing it right now.
How does it feel to know that even Brian Doyle has more guts than you by putting his real name to his posts?
The US government, apparently, is more trustworthy than the Dallas Police.You're the one claiming that the official US government version about Oswald's movements was correct, not me Fuckface.
It is a different world now. They ["they" being either Texas officials or US Federal official] would not get away with a bullshit investigation on this subject again.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?
Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The wuestion is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on him
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogationsBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TO
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
Corbet and Bud both are as delusional as a Jewish land grabbing settler.
DEEP DENIAL MOFOS!!!!!!!!!!
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:44:53 AM UTC+11, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:44:53 AM UTC+11, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Thanks for contribution, Brian. Entertaining as always.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:25:44 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
Corbet and Bud both are as delusional as a Jewish land grabbing settler.
DEEP DENIAL MOFOS!!!!!!!!!!As if anybody gives a shit what an anti-Semetic asshole like you thinks.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of it
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think. Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placingthe Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the third or fourth floor on the stairway". Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete, aninvestigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How could
Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know thatOswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....
The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that firstinterview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.
The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswaldclaimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.
Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of him--connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.
dcwFritz probably did not think it was an important issue. He was trying to nail Oswald for murder, not for meeting a cop near a stairway. And he probably wasn't worried about "Prayer Man" or the location of Shelly & Lovelady, either. The Warren Commission
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of it
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think.
Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the thirdor fourth floor on the stairway".
Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How could
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete, an
Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know thatOswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....
The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that firstinterview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.
The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswaldclaimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.
Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of him--connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.
dcw
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of
placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the third or fourth floor on the stairway". Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think. Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still
an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How couldIn his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete,
Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know that
interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that first
claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald
him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of
More of your silly "this must mean this figuring". Almost invariably, for any piece of evidence there
are multiple possible explanations but you always gravitate towards the one that takes you
where you want to go, ignoring all other possibilities.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of it
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think. Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placingthe Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the third or fourth floor on the stairway". Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete, aninvestigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How could
Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know thatOswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....
The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that firstinterview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.
The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswaldclaimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.
Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of him--connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of
placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the third or fourth floor on the stairway". Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think. Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still
an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How couldIn his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete,
Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know that
interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that first
claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald
him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of
dcw
Fritz probably did not think it was an important issue.Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of
He isn`t confused
*And Parker is particularly bad with them. He declares Reid a liar on the testimony of Hines, when her testimony is rife with qualifiers he chooses to ignore.
This is why witnesses, even police captains are best corroborated by more solid information.Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think.For good reason, but not why you think. How many people did Fritz talk to that day? Why should he know the layout of the TSBD? He is relating impressions on events that came at him from numerous directions, then relating those impression much later.
or fourth floor on the stairway".Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the third
No, he isn`t. He is saying investigation clarified the information
an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How couldMaybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete,
Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know that
interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that first
claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald
him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of
dcw
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:14:55 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where of
He isn`t confusedA perfect example of pathetic, almost laughable LN defensiveness in the face of the incontrovertible.
and he isn`t stuttering. Conspiracy folks do not understand qualifiers* (like they don`t understand reasoning and a whole truckload of other things). He is making it clear, through the use of qualifiers like "I believe" that he wasn`t 100% certain ofthe information he was providing.
*And Parker is particularly bad with them. He declares Reid a liar on the testimony of Hines, when her testimony is rife with qualifiers he chooses to ignore.So Hines is acting just like Fritz?
Or are you talking about Mrs. Liar Reid?This is why witnesses, even police captains are best corroborated by more solid information.
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think.For good reason, but not why you think. How many people did Fritz talk to that day? Why should he know the layout of the TSBD? He is relating impressions on events that came at him from numerous directions, then relating those impression much later.
third or fourth floor on the stairway".Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the
No, he isn`t. He is saying investigation clarified the informationHow does "on the third or fourth floor" clarify anything?
That's back to square one! Get with it, Robot!
, he doesn`t give a time when that clarification occurred. The interview with Oswald was part of the investigation, maybe that is when the location became more precise.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22.
How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December? You really need to review what you write before you post it...an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton? How
dcw
Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least complete,
Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know that
first interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that
claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald
him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life of
dcw
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:14:55 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
of it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and Where
the information he was providing.A perfect example of trying to explain simple things to morons.He isn`t confusedA perfect example of pathetic, almost laughable LN defensiveness in the face of the incontrovertible.
and he isn`t stuttering. Conspiracy folks do not understand qualifiers* (like they don`t understand reasoning and a whole truckload of other things). He is making it clear, through the use of qualifiers like "I believe" that he wasn`t 100% certain of
This is why witnesses, even police captains are best corroborated by more solid information.No, Parker was acting like you, unable or incapable of understanding simple things.*And Parker is particularly bad with them. He declares Reid a liar on the testimony of Hines, when her testimony is rife with qualifiers he chooses to ignore.So Hines is acting just like Fritz?
Or are you talking about Mrs. Liar Reid?
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think.For good reason, but not why you think. How many people did Fritz talk to that day? Why should he know the layout of the TSBD? He is relating impressions on events that came at him from numerous directions, then relating those impression much later.
third or fourth floor on the stairway".Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the
No lunchroom there.No, he isn`t. He is saying investigation clarified the informationHow does "on the third or fourth floor" clarify anything?
"...our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom."
That's back to square one! Get with it, Robot!That might be when Oswald told them where the encounter took place.
, he doesn`t give a time when that clarification occurred. The interview with Oswald was part of the investigation, maybe that is when the location became more precise.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22.
complete, an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton?How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December? You really need to review what you write before you post it...
dcw
Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least
that Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know
first interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that
Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch.
of him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life
dcw
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 1:55:52 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
No, I'm saying that Fritz had not seemed to have heard about the lunchroom encounter till the end of the year, although he inserted a reference to it in his 11/22 Oswald-interview report.Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
dcw
How many murders did Fritz handle a month? Why should he know, and retain the layout of the TSBD? The "third or fourth floor" sounds like Baker`s affidavit...
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 1:26:17 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:14:55 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 2:22:20 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:36:23 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 9:24:21 AM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
Where of it all, apparently aware of only one lunchroom in the depository.Here's my take on the scene in question:So Parker just made up the quote to make it appear Fritz was stuttering. When am I going to"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.This is quoting out of context, not evidence of stuttering.
learn not to accept conspiracy hobbyist claims at face value. This is a glaring example of
deceptive posting, AKA lying. When they are forced to blatantly make things up like this, it
reveals they have nothing of substance to offer.
Fritz, yes, is very confused, and confusing, almost, at one point, tongue-tied: "Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him, I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me...." He's lost in the Who and
of the information he was providing.A perfect example of trying to explain simple things to morons.He isn`t confusedA perfect example of pathetic, almost laughable LN defensiveness in the face of the incontrovertible.
and he isn`t stuttering. Conspiracy folks do not understand qualifiers* (like they don`t understand reasoning and a whole truckload of other things). He is making it clear, through the use of qualifiers like "I believe" that he wasn`t 100% certain
later. This is why witnesses, even police captains are best corroborated by more solid information.No, Parker was acting like you, unable or incapable of understanding simple things.*And Parker is particularly bad with them. He declares Reid a liar on the testimony of Hines, when her testimony is rife with qualifiers he chooses to ignore.So Hines is acting just like Fritz?
Or are you talking about Mrs. Liar Reid?
Fritz was lost. And for good reason, I think.For good reason, but not why you think. How many people did Fritz talk to that day? Why should he know the layout of the TSBD? He is relating impressions on events that came at him from numerous directions, then relating those impression much
third or fourth floor on the stairway".Go back to that line in his report: "[Oswald] said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in" (p600). Yet, as late as Dec. 23, 1963, the DPD Homicide Captain is still placing the Baker/Oswald confrontation "on the
Non sequitur.No lunchroom there.No, he isn`t. He is saying investigation clarified the informationHow does "on the third or fourth floor" clarify anything?
"...our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom." >That's back to square one! Get with it, Robot!No, on 11/22 all Oswald apparently said was that he got a drink from the 2nd floor.
, he doesn`t give a time when that clarification occurred. The interview with Oswald was part of the investigation, maybe that is when the location became more precise.That might be when Oswald told them where the encounter took place.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22.
Read my post for comprehension! In a later interview, he apparently did say the encounter took place at the building's front door. Apparently, again, he did not say it took place on the 2nd floor, whether or not it did. But Fritz & co. wantedunanimity.
dcwcomplete, an investigation into the matter of the site of the confrontation until sometime after Dec. 23rd! If, as it seems, Fritz had gotten conflicting information from his officer and from Oswald himself, wouldn't he have wanted a little clarificaton?
How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December? You really need to review what you write before you post it...
dcw
Maybe Fritz was not just ignoring the information provided by the suspect. Perhaps the latter did not actually provide it. That would help explain Fritz Adrift.
In his testimony, Fritz says that someone or some two told him that he/they ran into Oswald "on the stairway, but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom...." That would mean that Homicide did not begin, or at least
that Oswald supposedly said that he was stopped in the second-floor lunchroom. And he did not know it, I submit, because Oswald did not say it....Fritz and co., it seems, saw, for the longest time--well, for at least a month--nothing to investigate: "Mr. Baker says that he stopped this man on the third or fourth floor on the stairway." It's as if, on Dec. 23rd, Fritz still did not know
first interview session, said that he had bumped into a cop on the second floor.The undated Fritz notes and report must not have been written, or at least not completed, until after Dec. 23rd, when the Oswald reference to "second floor" was... revised, after Fritz was finally apprised of the "fact" that Oswald had, in that
Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building" (WR p613). This from the joint Hosty-Bookhout FBI report on the first interview.The truth, apparently, that is, was that all that Oswald had said about the second floor in that first interview was that he "went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch.
of him-- connect any soda machine with any confrontation, whether "on the third or fourth floor" stairway or on the second floor. So "second floor" never really entered into his Baker/Oswald thinking, even when Ball brought up the subject.Before Dec. 23rd, it sounds as if all that Fritz knew, all that he had heard from Oswald re the second floor was that the latter had simply gotten a soda there, for his lunch, which he ate "on the first floor". And Fritz could not--for the life
dcw
Holmes, Parker, Jesus. Three peas in a pod. All liars.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:25:44 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
Corbet and Bud both are as delusional as a Jewish land grabbing settler.
DEEP DENIAL MOFOS!!!!!!!!!!As if anybody gives a shit what an anti-Semetic asshole like you thinks.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:19:00 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
More of your silly "this must mean this figuring". Almost invariably, for any piece of evidence thereYou have learned Trump's major lesson well--never admit it even when you're dead wrong and you know it.
are multiple possible explanations but you always gravitate towards the one that takes you
where you want to go, ignoring all other possibilities.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:41:06 PM UTC+1, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:25:44 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
Corbet and Bud both are as delusional as a Jewish land grabbing settler.
Touched a nerve there haven't I? An extremist Christian like you believing and supporting this delusional GOD thing. You poor delusional nutter.DEEP DENIAL MOFOS!!!!!!!!!!As if anybody gives a shit what an anti-Semetic asshole like you thinks.
This is just beautiful, it exposes you exactly of who you are.
See you at Lancer, we should talk some more!
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans. How many murders did Fritz handle a month? Why should he know, and retain the layout of the TSBD? The "third or fourth floor" sounds like Baker`s affidavit...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 4:30:53 AM UTC-4, robert johnson wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:41:06 PM UTC+1, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 8:17:26 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 1:55:52 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
It`s in his notes.No, I'm saying that Fritz had not seemed to have heard about the lunchroom encounter till the end of the year, although he inserted a reference to it in his 11/22 Oswald-interview report.Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
dcw
How many murders did Fritz handle a month? Why should he know, and retain the layout of the TSBD? The "third or fourth floor" sounds like Baker`s affidavit...
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:04:47 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 8:17:26 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 1:55:52 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Yes, it's inserted into his notes, too, written long after the fact.It`s in his notes.No, I'm saying that Fritz had not seemed to have heard about the lunchroom encounter till the end of the year, although he inserted a reference to it in his 11/22 Oswald-interview report.Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
dcw
How many murders did Fritz handle a month? Why should he know, and retain the layout of the TSBD? The "third or fourth floor" sounds like Baker`s affidavit...
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 11:43:28 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 6:04:47 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 8:17:26 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 1:55:52 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 4:29:24 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:You say it like it is a bad thing.
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning".
IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Whatever your ideas require, Don.Yes, it's inserted into his notes, too, written long after the fact.It`s in his notes.No, I'm saying that Fritz had not seemed to have heard about the lunchroom encounter till the end of the year, although he inserted a reference to it in his 11/22 Oswald-interview report.Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":You folks expect a perfect, flawless accounting from imperfect, flawed humans.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
dcw
How many murders did Fritz handle a month? Why should he know, and retain the layout of the TSBD? The "third or fourth floor" sounds like Baker`s affidavit...
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
But as usual you idiots contrive reasons to disregard the best source, Truly, who was with Baker and knew the building, to focus on the wrong thing, Fritz`s (who wasn`t there) understanding of where the encounter took place.
THE LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER (REVISITED): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-973.htmlbeen shot, and who was not paying close attention at all to what floor he was standing on when he pointed his gun at Lee Harvey Oswald's stomach in the lunchroom on November 22, 1963?" -- DVP; December 2017
Excerpts.....
"Why can't conspiracists accept Marrion Baker's "third or fourth floor" statement for what it so clearly is — a simple and honest mistake made by a police officer who was in a chaotic and frantic situation within minutes of the President having just
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
what the answers are. You're the other guy.him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
Your version is dead without your excuses, speculations and assumptions. My version needs none of that.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:07:22 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:just been shot, and who was not paying close attention at all to what floor he was standing on when he pointed his gun at Lee Harvey Oswald's stomach in the lunchroom on November 22, 1963?" -- DVP; December 2017
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 9:58:35 AM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:
THE LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER (REVISITED): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-973.html
Excerpts.....
"Why can't conspiracists accept Marrion Baker's "third or fourth floor" statement for what it so clearly is — a simple and honest mistake made by a police officer who was in a chaotic and frantic situation within minutes of the President having
You need to speculate and make assumptions. I need no such crutches.
Please. You assume everyone who gave information that conflicts with your childish ideas was lying.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 9:58:35 AM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:just been shot, and who was not paying close attention at all to what floor he was standing on when he pointed his gun at Lee Harvey Oswald's stomach in the lunchroom on November 22, 1963?" -- DVP; December 2017
THE LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER (REVISITED): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-973.html
Excerpts.....
"Why can't conspiracists accept Marrion Baker's "third or fourth floor" statement for what it so clearly is — a simple and honest mistake made by a police officer who was in a chaotic and frantic situation within minutes of the President having
You need to speculate and make assumptions. I need no such crutches.
But for the sake of argument, let's ASSUME that at the time, he stopped and questioned this person because he thought he may be the perp. In that scenario, it is kind of important to get the facts right. Baker's statement got nothing right.have got any 5 year old to run up to the top of that or any building. It is not rocket science. Stick to the stairs until you can't go any higher.
Got the floor wrong - 3rd or 4th as opposed to 2nd
Got the precise location wrong - stairs as opposed to lunchroom
Got the physical description wrong - despite eyeballing Oswald as his statement is being given.
Got the clothing description wrong.
You know all this because you have been taken to task over it more times than you've had home cooking.
Your version is dead without your excuses, speculations and assumptions. My version needs none of that.
And I repeat yet again, the stairs were of the type common in offices buildings of the era. Two short flights to every floor. Four flights = 2 floors, not 4 floors. He did not need Truly to show him the way up. He was trying to get to the top. I could
The rest snipped. Who gives a shit about you debate with Jim di on this subject. You are on my thread. Respond top what I have written, not some past debate with someone not even here.
Sheesh, indeed. But it is the type of bullshit you do. So there is that in your favor. If predictability can be seen as a positive at all.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:07:22 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Your version is dead without your excuses, speculations and assumptions. My version needs none of that.Your version requires *both* Baker & Truly to be rotten liars.
IOW, your version is something only an idiot would swallow.
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola from the soft-drink machine, atwhich time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there."
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Key phrases in the above Bookhout report:
"OSWALD STATED..."
"HE WAS ON THE **SECOND FLOOR**..."
So, apparently Greg Parker thinks that James W. Bookhout just IMAGINED Oswald saying those things (even though Bookhout was right there in Fritz' office with Oswald when Oswald "stated" those various things.
Or did Bookhout just MAKE UP those things that he said Oswald had "stated"?
You've got room for one more liar (Bookhout) on your front porch, don't you Gregory?
*** HILARITY BREAK! ***famous scene in Stone's movie would have looked quite different. No one gave the affidavit a second look. In fact, few if any gave it a FIRST look. So Don [Jeffries] and anyone else claiming they questioned if the second floor lunchroom story ever
GREG PARKER SAID (IN JULY 2015):
Up until 2001 or 02, the only criticism of the second floor lunch story was about how long it would take Oswald to get down there from 6. No one suggested that meant there was no encounter on the second floor. If anyone HAD suggested it, I believe the
DON JEFFRIES SAID:
You [Greg Parker] won't win any prizes for it, but if it makes you feel better, keep claiming credit for being the first to doubt Baker encountered Oswald.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
This is hilarity at its finest.
It's kind of like wanting to take credit for being the person who designed The Edsel.
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22081-why-does-dvp-rattle-cages-here/?do=findComment&comment=310010
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - an indicator -Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police interview
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.
Let me help you out of your pickle.sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.
You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.
ROFLhim with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance. It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.
It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
And yet as I showed above, that is precisely what you have been doing throughout
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Oh dear. Still playing dumb.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
ROFL. Your posts so far, have you fucking yourself up so hard with disingenuous bullshit, you're starting to walk like a jockey.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:23:44 PM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there."
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola from the soft-drink machine, at
floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in.https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Key phrases in the above Bookhout report:
"OSWALD STATED..."
"HE WAS ON THE **SECOND FLOOR**..."
So, apparently Greg Parker thinks that James W. Bookhout just IMAGINED Oswald saying those things (even though Bookhout was right there in Fritz' office with Oswald when Oswald "stated" those various things.
Or did Bookhout just MAKE UP those things that he said Oswald had "stated"?
You've got room for one more liar (Bookhout) on your front porch, don't you Gregory?Why do you believe Bookhout?
Fritz report: I asked him what part of the building he was in at the time the President was shot, and he said that he was having his lunch about that time on the first floor.
Fritz report: Mr. Truly had told me that one of the police officers had stopped this man immediately after the shooting somewhere near the back stairway, so I asked Oswald where he was when the police officer stopped him. He said he was on the second
Fritz testimony:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
-----------------WITNESSES PUT ON THAT FLOOR WITH A BUNC OF OTHERS, NONE OF WHO SAW DIDDLY SQUAT.
So Truly initially lied saying the encounter was near the back stairway AND OSWALD told the truth that it was in the 2nd floor lunchroom - according to you? Correct?
All of this conflicting information, not just from Oswald, but also from Baker and Truly, caused Fritz to "investigate" according to his own testimony. What was the nature of that investigation? MRS FUCXKING REID TRULY's FUCKING SECRETARY WHO OTHER
Now quit yer farnarckling around and address the Batchelor report, and how it relates to what Buell testified to, what Holmes quoted Oswald as stating and in regard to the Oswald information on the Kaminski list of names.Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building."
Then of course, there is the Hosty-Bookhout joint report which negates Bookhout's solo effort
"Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch.
Again, as with the Fritz and Hosty notes, we see a timeline of Oswald's alibi. In this version, there is no mention of any cop encounter. Which is probably why Bookhout later submitted a solo report.
-Broke for lunch i
-Went up to grab a coke to have with lunch
-Went back and had lunch in the domino room
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
Cite your credentials analyze speech patterns. Otherwise, you're just jerking off.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.Why do you ask questions that call for speculation than get snotty when you are answered
with speculation.
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.Have at it, asshole.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.But apparently you can't explain it.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....As I was saying. You have no explanation.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.You won't explain why it is important. You think you prove something by raising questions.
You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.Fritz was not stuttering. You tried to make it seem like he was stuttering by drastically editing
the quote. I fucked up by believing you were honestly quoting Fritz. I'll admit that was a pretty
stupid thing to do. It won't happen again. I'll assume anything your write from this day forward
is a lie until it can be verified.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.I said 12 hours you lying fuck. Is there any lie you won't tell. Your whoppers put Joe Biden to
shame.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 11:33:44 AM UTC+11, Bud wrote:just been shot, and who was not paying close attention at all to what floor he was standing on when he pointed his gun at Lee Harvey Oswald's stomach in the lunchroom on November 22, 1963?" -- DVP; December 2017
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 8:07:22 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 9:58:35 AM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:
THE LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER (REVISITED): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-973.html
Excerpts.....
"Why can't conspiracists accept Marrion Baker's "third or fourth floor" statement for what it so clearly is — a simple and honest mistake made by a police officer who was in a chaotic and frantic situation within minutes of the President having
You need to speculate and make assumptions. I need no such crutches.
Please. You assume everyone who gave information that conflicts with your childish ideas was lying.I made no such comment.
Baker's 1st day statement is at odds with the official version is a fact. I make no assumptions about how or why he got it wrong.
You and DVP however, fall over yourselves to speculate that he was "mistaken" and then compound the speculation by assuming he was rattled by the moment.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:58:01 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
Cite your credentials analyze speech patterns. Otherwise, you're just jerking off.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
Because I am the one being accused of making assumptions and speculating, I have not done either. But you need to to to explain away Baker's initial statament and a bunch ofother stuff.LOL. Speculating like crazy.Why do you ask questions that call for speculation than get snotty when you are answered
with speculation.
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.Have at it, asshole.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
It is self-explanatory. Except maybe to an orangutan.Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.But apparently you can't explain it.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....As I was saying. You have no explanation.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
No. I can explain it. I just have no need to.You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.You won't explain why it is important. You think you prove something by raising questions.
You wanting me to jump through unneccessary hoops doesn't count as a valid reason.
I supplied the full quote, then repeated the parts that constituted what in lay terms is stuttering. Sorry if that confused you.You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.Fritz was not stuttering. You tried to make it seem like he was stuttering by drastically editing
the quote. I fucked up by believing you were honestly quoting Fritz. I'll admit that was a pretty
stupid thing to do. It won't happen again. I'll assume anything your write from this day forward
is a lie until it can be verified.
Let me confuse you some more.
Fritz technically, was not stuttering. But it IS what police refer to as stuttering.
What it really was is dysfluency. The inability to talk smoothly.
This can affect anyone under stress, or because of nervousness, or being over-tired.
Which is why police consider it a SIGN that the person may be lying.
Yes, but you meant 2.But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.I said 12 hours you lying fuck. Is there any lie you won't tell. Your whoppers put Joe Biden to
shame.
He was picked up in about 2. According to you they got the right man. Ergo, they wrapped it up in 2 according to you. UNLESS....
You have specific evidence in mind that was obtained in the first 12 hours? Which brings us up around the midnight press conference when the cops and ol Henry were telling the media that they had the case cinched.
So name the evidence obtained in that 12 hours that convinces you that wrapped it up in that time?
This should be good for a laugh since Hoover was telling LBJ that the case was not good and ol Henry was telling the media that Oswald had planned it for months and had calmly sat at the window eating lunch while waiting for the kill shot.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts.
THE LUNCHROOM ENCOUNTER (REVISITED):
http://jfk-archives.blog
Excerpts.....
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:23:44 PM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there."
"OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola from the soft-drink machine, at
floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in.https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Key phrases in the above Bookhout report:
"OSWALD STATED..."
"HE WAS ON THE **SECOND FLOOR**..."
So, apparently Greg Parker thinks that James W. Bookhout just IMAGINED Oswald saying those things (even though Bookhout was right there in Fritz' office with Oswald when Oswald "stated" those various things.
Or did Bookhout just MAKE UP those things that he said Oswald had "stated"?
You've got room for one more liar (Bookhout) on your front porch, don't you Gregory?Why do you believe Bookhout?
Fritz report: I asked him what part of the building he was in at the time the President was shot, and he said that he was having his lunch about that time on the first floor.
Fritz report: Mr. Truly had told me that one of the police officers had stopped this man immediately after the shooting somewhere near the back stairway, so I asked Oswald where he was when the police officer stopped him. He said he was on the second
Fritz testimony:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
-----------------WITNESSES PUT ON THAT FLOOR WITH A BUNC OF OTHERS, NONE OF WHO SAW DIDDLY SQUAT.
So Truly initially lied saying the encounter was near the back stairway AND OSWALD told the truth that it was in the 2nd floor lunchroom - according to you? Correct?
All of this conflicting information, not just from Oswald, but also from Baker and Truly, caused Fritz to "investigate" according to his own testimony. What was the nature of that investigation? MRS FUCXKING REID TRULY's FUCKING SECRETARY WHO OTHER
Now quit yer farnarckling around and address the Batchelor report, and how it relates to what Buell testified to, what Holmes quoted Oswald as stating and in regard to the Oswald information on the Kaminski list of names.Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building."
Then of course, there is the Hosty-Bookhout joint report which negates Bookhout's solo effort
"Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch.
Again, as with the Fritz and Hosty notes, we see a timeline of Oswald's alibi. In this version, there is no mention of any cop encounter. Which is probably why Bookhout later submitted a solo report.
-Broke for lunch i
-Went up to grab a coke to have with lunch
-Went back and had lunch in the domino room
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
Cite your credentials analyze speech patterns. Otherwise, you're just jerking off.sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.Why do you ask questions that call for speculation than get snotty when you are answered
with speculation.
Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.Have at it, asshole.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.But apparently you can't explain it.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....As I was saying. You have no explanation.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
on him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.You won't explain why it is important. You think you prove something by raising questions.
You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.Fritz was not stuttering. You tried to make it seem like he was stuttering by drastically editing
the quote. I fucked up by believing you were honestly quoting Fritz. I'll admit that was a pretty
stupid thing to do. It won't happen again. I'll assume anything your write from this day forward
is a lie until it can be verified.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.I said 12 hours you lying fuck. Is there any lie you won't tell. Your whoppers put Joe Biden to
shame.
ROFL
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance. It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.I make no assumptions. Oswald told numerous lies during his various interrogations. What's
one more.
It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.It is you who is lying his ass off. When Baker said 3rd or 4th floor, it's obvious he was unsure
where the encounter took place because it could not have happened in two different places.
The fact is the encounter took place in the 2nd floor lunchroom because there wasn't a
lunchroom on the 3rd of 4th floor.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.You're full of shit. As if your doctoring of Fritz's quote was a fact.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
And yet as I showed above, that is precisely what you have been doing throughoutYou ask me questions that require speculation and then chastise me for speculating. You
really are an asshole.
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Oh dear. Still playing dumb.With you, it's not an act.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
ROFL. Your posts so far, have you fucking yourself up so hard with disingenuous bullshit, you're starting to walk like a jockey.Was that your attempt to sound clever? It didn't work.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 10:42:51 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:58:01 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway,
excessive swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue;
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
find personally appealing.Cite your credentials analyze speech patterns. Otherwise, you're just jerking off.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
Of course you have. You guys ask for explanations and when they are offered you either cry "speculation!" or pooh-pooh them. Meanwhile you speculate dozens of fantastic occurrences, and pile one the other.Because I am the one being accused of making assumptions and speculating, I have not done either.LOL. Speculating like crazy.Why do you ask questions that call for speculation than get snotty when you are answered
with speculation.
All the conspiracy hobbyists here are delusional, they act like they have a crystal ball that allows them to correctly discern events, but what they really have are individual funhouse mirrors, that distort information into shapes and patterns they
meanwhile imagining other possibilities that are many hundreds of times more fantastic.But you need to to to explain away Baker's initial statament and a bunch ofother stuff.That is where you are wrong. *YOU* need to establish that it is impossible for a second floor lunchroom encounter and Baker initial affidavit to co-exist. And all you are going to be able to do is employ the "argument from incredulity" fallacy, while
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.Have at it, asshole.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
It is self-explanatory. Except maybe to an orangutan.Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.But apparently you can't explain it.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....As I was saying. You have no explanation.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
No. I can explain it. I just have no need to. You wanting me to jump through unneccessary hoops doesn't count as a valid reason.You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.You won't explain why it is important. You think you prove something by raising questions.
I supplied the full quote, then repeated the parts that constituted what in lay terms is stuttering. Sorry if that confused you.You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.Fritz was not stuttering. You tried to make it seem like he was stuttering by drastically editing
the quote. I fucked up by believing you were honestly quoting Fritz. I'll admit that was a pretty
stupid thing to do. It won't happen again. I'll assume anything your write from this day forward
is a lie until it can be verified.
Let me confuse you some more.
Fritz technically, was not stuttering. But it IS what police refer to as stuttering.
What it really was is dysfluency. The inability to talk smoothly.I suppose when you have nothing, you are forced to pretend that nothing is something.
This can affect anyone under stress, or because of nervousness, or being over-tired.
Which is why police consider it a SIGN that the person may be lying.
Yes, but you meant 2. He was picked up in about 2.But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.I said 12 hours you lying fuck. Is there any lie you won't tell. Your whoppers put Joe Biden to
shame.
He had just killed a cop. They arrest you for stuff like that.
According to you they got the right man. Ergo, they wrapped it up in 2 according to you. UNLESS....
You have specific evidence in mind that was obtained in the first 12 hours? Which brings us up around the midnight press conference when the cops and ol Henry were telling the media that they had the case cinched.
So name the evidence obtained in that 12 hours that convinces you that wrapped it up in that time?
This should be good for a laugh since Hoover was telling LBJ that the case was not good and ol Henry was telling the media that Oswald had planned it for months and had calmly sat at the window eating lunch while waiting for the kill shot.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:58:01 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
Cite your credentials analyze speech patterns. Otherwise, you're just jerking off.
Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
Because I am the one being accused of making assumptions and speculating, I have not done either.LOL. Speculating like crazy.Why do you ask questions that call for speculation than get snotty when you are answered
with speculation.
But you need to to to explain away Baker's initial statament and a bunch ofother stuff.
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.Have at it, asshole.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
It is self-explanatory. Except maybe to an orangutan.Stevie Wonder could see why it matters.But apparently you can't explain it.
You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....As I was saying. You have no explanation.
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
No. I can explain it. I just have no need to. You wanting me to jump through unneccessary hoops doesn't count as a valid reason.You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important.You won't explain why it is important. You think you prove something by raising questions.
I supplied the full quote, then repeated the parts that constituted what in lay terms is stuttering. Sorry if that confused you.You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.Fritz was not stuttering. You tried to make it seem like he was stuttering by drastically editing
the quote. I fucked up by believing you were honestly quoting Fritz. I'll admit that was a pretty
stupid thing to do. It won't happen again. I'll assume anything your write from this day forward
is a lie until it can be verified.
Let me confuse you some more.
Fritz technically, was not stuttering. But it IS what police refer to as stuttering.
What it really was is dysfluency. The inability to talk smoothly.
This can affect anyone under stress, or because of nervousness, or being over-tired.
Which is why police consider it a SIGN that the person may be lying.
Yes, but you meant 2. He was picked up in about 2.But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.I said 12 hours you lying fuck. Is there any lie you won't tell. Your whoppers put Joe Biden to
shame.
According to you they got the right man. Ergo, they wrapped it up in 2 according to you. UNLESS....
You have specific evidence in mind that was obtained in the first 12 hours? Which brings us up around the midnight press conference when the cops and ol Henry were telling the media that they had the case cinched.
So name the evidence obtained in that 12 hours that convinces you that wrapped it up in that time?
This should be good for a laugh since Hoover was telling LBJ that the case was not good and ol Henry was telling the media that Oswald had planned it for months and had calmly sat at the window eating lunch while waiting for the kill shot.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 9:57:47 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:23:44 PM UTC+11, David Von Pein wrote:
lunch. Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building.""Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his
Easy. Because there were no cops in the TSBD clearing the employees to leave AT 12:33 PM (which is the approx. time LHO left the building). Hence, Holmes can't possibly be referring to the "Police Clearing The Employees At The Front Door" situationwhen referring to anything relating to OSWALD on 11/22.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:37:10 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:19:00 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
Said the pot to the kettle.More of your silly "this must mean this figuring". Almost invariably, for any piece of evidence thereYou have learned Trump's major lesson well--never admit it even when you're dead wrong and you know it.
are multiple possible explanations but you always gravitate towards the one that takes you
where you want to go, ignoring all other possibilities.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 2:41:11 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:37:10 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:19:00 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
Said the pot to the kettle.More of your silly "this must mean this figuring". Almost invariably, for any piece of evidence thereYou have learned Trump's major lesson well--never admit it even when you're dead wrong and you know it.
are multiple possible explanations but you always gravitate towards the one that takes you
where you want to go, ignoring all other possibilities.
You're applying that aphorism to the wrong person. I used to think that Oswald wasn't the depository shooter, remember? I later admitted that I thought that he must have been.
Now, I predict that you won't admit you're wrong re pot/kettle...
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:58:01 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
stairway. What happened? Perhaps Vickie Adams...The fact is the encounter took place in the 2nd floor lunchroom because there wasn't a
lunchroom on the 3rd of 4th floor.
Faulty logic. Baker does not mention a lunchroom in his 11/22 affidavit. "I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around & came back toward me." Early on 11/22, then, Baker has the encounter taking place on the
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogationsBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TO
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as totheir employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:49:54 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
The Oswald interview was on 11/22. How could something written that day "clarify" something written in December?Good question. You'll have to excuse Bud, he doesn't deal in evidence, he deals in "reasoning". IOW, speculation not supported by facts.
Here's the 12/23 note from Fritz to Chief Curry where Fritz says Baker said he encountered a man on the third or fourth floor "on the stairway" and Truly "identified him as one of the employees":
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29121#relPageId=2
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 4:02:53 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
When you do not know the facts, you are not entitled to just make them up as you have hear. The evidence precludes the 2nd floor encounter, not me.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.As Greg Parker has already said, he only believes his own arguments because he thinks Prayer Man is Oswald. Otherwise he would be a Nutter.
So every argument Parker makes presupposes Oswald's innocence. Oswald is not innocent because the 2nd floor encounter "didn't happen." The 2nd floor encounter didn't happen because Oswald is innocent. This is Parker Logic.
To me it seems reasonable that Baker might have a confused memory of which floor it was on, not being familiar with the buildingYep. There it is. That was the Nutter argument when I first raised this 20 years ago. It hasn't aged well.
Baker was not interested in floor plans. He wanted to get to the top of the building. I could get a 5 year old to find his or her way to the top of any building. Not hard. Stick to the stairs till you can't go any further. Not even Baker was that dumb.So that takes out the need to have Truly show him the way.
His memory failure is another bullshit Nutter argument. Most office buildings of the era have the same type stairs. You go up some stairs, reach a landing, then go up another flight. That constitutes one floor. Not hard to do the math on which flooryou were on and not hard to tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Typical stairs of the era covering a single floor https://inspectapedia.com/Stairs/Stair-Landing-Dimensions.jpgshow was stationed at the door confirming those leaving were employees? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly who then reported Oswald as missing? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly whose wife was a cousin to the founder of the Flying
He would have to have been from outer space to run up 4 flights of stairs and think that equaled the number of floors he covered.
His actions are confirmed by Truly,
Roy Sansom Truly? Cousin to Fred Korth's wife and the lawyer whose office Oswald attended to have his manuscript typed up? The Roy Sansom Truly who hired Oswald despite not needing him? That Roy Sansom Truly? The Roy Sansom Truly who official records
and by Garner, for whom Parker requires Lumpkin to be in uniform, which he wasn't.
The problems with Garner include that she never personally confirmed or signed off on what was written. There was at least one witness who said Truly never left the first floor. If she did not see Truly and Lumpkin going up, then the story is simply afabrication by Garner or the person who wrote it. Let's face it, the bullshit story needed all the support it could coerce.
Truly might not be a reliable witness, but there's no reason to think that he was in cahoots with Baker.he just wants to reopen the case, whatever that means. He doesn't want to prove the case, he just wants to tell the US government to have another go at it.
Absolutely. Baker was kept away from EVERYONE until he got his head right on what happened.
Truly must tell the truth because of Baker being present. But since Parker knows that the fuzzy old lady in the doorway is Oswald, he must call Baker a liar. Parker Logic demands it. It's hard to believe that Parker believes his own argument here. But
Listen Fuckface McGee or whatever name you use these days... Parker has the guts to put his name to what he claims. He uses actual evidence to support his claims. Much of that evidence was either found by Parker, or by others following Parker's leadsand generating their own further leads. You can claim all you want that I started with a conclusion, but my posting history shows otherwise. Making up bullshit that suits you, is your domain. You are doing it right now.
How does it feel to know that even Brian Doyle has more guts than you by putting his real name to his posts?
The US government, apparently, is more trustworthy than the Dallas Police.You're the one claiming that the official US government version about Oswald's movements was correct, not me Fuckface.
It is a different world now. They ["they" being either Texas officials or US Federal official] would not get away with a bullshit investigation on this subject again.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - an indicator -Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police interview
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.
Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters. You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important. You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.
ROFL
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance. It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.
It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
And yet as I showed above, that is precisely what you have been doing throughout
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Oh dear. Still playing dumb.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
ROFL. Your posts so far, have you fucking yourself up so hard with disingenuous bullshit, you're starting to walk like a jockey.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - an indicator -Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police interview
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.
Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters. You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important. You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.
ROFL
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had on
What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance.
It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.
It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
And yet as I showed above, that is precisely what you have been doing throughout
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Oh dear. Still playing dumb.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
ROFL. Your posts so far, have you fucking yourself up so hard with disingenuous bullshit, you're starting to walk like a jockey.
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.
Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters. You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
on him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important. You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.
ROFL
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had
got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance.No, that’s incorrect. Holmes testified thusly:
== quote ==
Then he said when all this commotion started, "I just went on downstairs." And he didn't say whether he took the elevator or not. He said, "I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I
== unquote ==
There are four problems with your attempt to utilize Holmes statement here: 1. It is hearsay. Hearsay isn’t allowed in court except under certain limited conditions.
2. It isn’t a precise quote of what Oswald said - it’s clearly a paraphrase.
3. Holmes is testifying months later and this is a recollection of what Oswald said. But memory is malleable and is influenced by things you see and hear and read later.
3. The statement Holmes gave is imprecise in terms of where all this happened - you are assuming it happened at the front door, but Holmes didn’t say Oswald located it there, that’s solely your assumption.
Let’s look at this in detail:
“ He said, "I went down…”
— To where? From the sixth to the second would suffice, wouldn’t it?
“and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me…”
— This would fit the encounter as described by Baker and Truly, and in Bookhout’s memorandum for the record.
“… just before I got to the front door,”
— How long before is “just before”? Would the second floor suffice on a trip from the sixth floor?
“…and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building….”
— This would fit the encounter as described by Baker and Truly, and in Bookhout’s memorandum for the record. Except for “officers” - in the official story and your version, there is only one officer that Truly related those words to.
“…so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.
— Except we both know Oswald didn’t step aside and wait for anyone to get to him. He left the building.
“…Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about." — This fits what we know Oswald did. He left.s precisely what you’re doing here.
It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.Of course Holmes got it wrong. No one recalls word-for-word a conversation from months earlier. Some — if not most — of that language has to be a reconstruction. You can’t rely on a reconstructed hearsay account as evidence of anything. But that
Oswald gotto the roominghouse by “about one o’clock”.It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.
You ignore inconvenient facts as well.
For example, there’s also a little problem of putting him on a bus by 12:37 or so, and then taking a cab to his rooming house by “about one o’clock”. So explain how a bus transfer from McWatter’s bus wound up in Oswald’s possession, and how
Was everyone there all lying or mistaken as well? Flesh this out for us. What happens after Oswald leaves the TSBD at 12:45orthereafter, and how is he identified by Bledsoe on a bus and by Roberts at the roominghouse? Why do multiple witnesses pick himout of lineups as the person they saw in the vicinity of the Tippit murder?
Let us know what you’ve come up with so far.
I am offering you the opportunity to provide alternative ones. Which you won't do. You will simply keep using your broad brush and pointy finger and disingenuous takes on what I said in order tto deflect and avoid.
I think it is a silly exercise to make assumptions without knowing the facts. You on the other
hand seem to have no problem doing that.
And yet as I showed above, that is precisely what you have been doing throughout
You're just fucked up ethically and morally.
At least I can figure out a slam dunk 60 year old murder case that the cops had solved in the
first 12 hours.
You mean "solved".I thought that's what I wrote.
Oh dear. Still playing dumb.
Curry knew it wasn't. Hoover knew it wasn't. You know it wasn't.
Strike one. Strike two. Strike three.
You went down swinging and missing.
ROFL. Your posts so far, have you fucking yourself up so hard with disingenuous bullshit, you're starting to walk like a jockey.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TOBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 7:48:16 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 10:30:52 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 8:41:01 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 2:37:35 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 10:51:23 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Friday, October 13, 2023 at 12:48:34 PM UTC+11, John Corbett wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
interview of him as a witness, his baseline speech patterns were well established prior to the stutter appearing. If this had been a police interview, the sudden appearance of the stutter would be taken as an indicator - not evidence - not proof - anThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Well, there was a tad more than that to it.And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.We're going on 60 years and this is the best you guys can come up with. Fritz stuttered. There's
the smoking gun for you.
But even that on it's own is telling. As is your inability to do any better than pick out on thing and pretend that's all there is and it means nothing.
Your assumption that Fritz's stuttering is evidence he was lying is not evidence.I don't give a shit what anyone else is doing. Focus on what is happening in THIS thread. Focus on the evidence posted in THIS thread.Muthafuckahs bin fried on less evidence. It's police methodology, doncha know. The science of picking out liars. The science of following the evidence.All the evidence points to Oswald and nobody else. Conspiracy hobbyists are on a snipe hunt and they are all going in different directions. We're supposed to believe they are following
evidence.
Your analysis that I was assuming anything is wrong.
What I said was very clear. But I will give you more detail since you're playing dumb. As with a polygraph, you need a baseline of someone's normal speech pattern before making any determination. If Fritz's testimony had instead been a police
sniffing around the truth made him panic into trying to stamp out a possible fire at his feet. His evident panic only succeeded in fanning the flames.Truly never left the 1st floor until it got past 12:45 - the end of the lunch break - the earliest opportunity to report a worker missing, since they cannot be MISSING on their own time.You're just making shit up.
Do better or admit you are screwed 10 ways to Sunday.
Okay. You're engaged. Good. Why do you think he stuttered in that particular part of his voluminous testimony and nowhere else?Tell me WHY the one instance of Fritz stuttering is meaningless.People stutter for lots of reasons. Every person who stutters isn't lying.
Your question calls for speculation. I have no idea why he would stutter because the
possibilities are numerous. Maybe he was trying to remember something. Maybe he wanted to
make sure he didn't misspeak while under oath and was choosing his words carefully. As is
the custom of conspiracy hobbyists, you treat and unknown as an opportunity to fill in the blanks
to your liking.
LOL. Speculating like crazy.
Let me help you out of your pickle.
Unlike you, Fritz obviously did not like to speculate, or stretch his powers of recall. In his first appearance alone before the commission, he said "I don't remember" 19 times. He had that option here, but instead, the thought that they might be
Why do think police are trained to look for signs of lying including stuttering from a mnon-stutterer?Having never taken police training, I have no idea if that is true or why it is taught if it is true.
I provided a justice dept link showing it is true, Bozo.
We can all make judgements as to a person's truthfulness based on their demeanor but that
doesn't mean our judgements are accurate.
It provides a sound basis for questioning a statement and investigating it further.
Yet you can't tell me why it matters. Seems we are at an impasse.Oh lawd. Anything to avoid addressing it. Okay. Got it. You know it matters and no way you are going to address it.Tell me how the Batchelor report is wrong.First you need to tell me why it matters.
Stevie Wonder could see why it matters. You know how it goes.... there are none so blind as those who will not see. And there you are... standing in the willful blindness corner....
Tell me how Oswald confirmed the Truly-Kaminski details per Harry Holmes' report and testimony
on him with an address to show Kaminski. Do you see how each piece fits neatly in place? Do you understand that this is the way it all went down? Of course you do. You're not fucked up in the head like Brian.The answer is I don't know the answer and neither do you. One of us is unwilling to assumeThe answers are self-explanatory when you view all of the evidence together. The question is only for you, as a denier of the evidence. But once again, you are going to do and say anything to avoid the answers.Tell me how the list typed up from the Truly-Kaminski effort has Oswald's name on it at the top - especially since he was supposedly long gone by the time they started - and it was typed before his correct address was known.This is a classic example of a conspiracy hobbyist trying to prove his case my raising
questions. You don't prove anything by raising questions. You have to find the answers. You
can't just assume the answer you want to believe.
You don't have any answer to the document showing Truly and Kaminski vetting people to leave. You don't know why it is important. You don't understand why a non-stutterer suddenly stuttering on one question only should be suspicious.
But you DO believe the Dallas police wrapped up this case in 2 hours.
ROFL
what the answers are. You're the other guy.
Tell me how Oswald's address was given by Truly as the Paine house in Irving, and as a rooming house by an unknown officer, yet this list has an old Elsbeth address - an address only listed in one place - his library card which is all he had
got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.What about this? What about this? Do you guys ever try to find the answers to the questions
your raise.
I already know the answers.
Because you think your assumptions are correct.
What assumptions? You haven't pointed to any.
It is a fact that Truly and Kaminski were stationed at the door.
It is a fact that Kaminski was checking ID and taking contact details.
It is a fact that Truly was advising him of the employment status of the person leaving.
It is a fact that Holmes stated that Oswald had said he encountered Mr Truly and a cop at the front entrance.No, that’s incorrect. Holmes testified thusly:
== quote ==
Then he said when all this commotion started, "I just went on downstairs." And he didn't say whether he took the elevator or not. He said, "I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I
== unquote ==
There are four problems with your attempt to utilize Holmes statement here: 1. It is hearsay. Hearsay isn’t allowed in court except under certain limited conditions.
2. It isn’t a precise quote of what Oswald said - it’s clearly a paraphrase.
3. Holmes is testifying months later and this is a recollection of what Oswald said. But memory is malleable and is influenced by things you see and hear and read later.
3. The statement Holmes gave is imprecise in terms of where all this happened - you are assuming it happened at the front door, but Holmes didn’t say Oswald located it there, that’s solely your assumption.
Let’s look at this in detail:
“ He said, "I went down…”
— To where? From the sixth to the second would suffice, wouldn’t it?
“and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me…”
— This would fit the encounter as described by Baker and Truly, and in Bookhout’s memorandum for the record.
“… just before I got to the front door,”
— How long before is “just before”? Would the second floor suffice on a trip from the sixth floor?
“…and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building….”
— This would fit the encounter as described by Baker and Truly, and in Bookhout’s memorandum for the record. Except for “officers” - in the official story and your version, there is only one officer that Truly related those words to.
“…so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.
— Except we both know Oswald didn’t step aside and wait for anyone to get to him. He left the building.
“…Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about." — This fits what we know Oswald did. He left.s precisely what you’re doing here.
It is YOU who assumes either Holmes got it wrong or Oswald lied.Of course Holmes got it wrong. No one recalls word-for-word a conversation from months earlier. Some — if not most — of that language has to be a reconstruction. You can’t rely on a reconstructed hearsay account as evidence of anything. But that
Oswald gotto the roominghouse by “about one o’clock”.It is a fact that Baker said he encountered someone on the 3rd or 4th floor. It is YOU who assumes he could not tell the difference between a landing and a lunchroom.
Seems to me, I have stuck to facts and you have continually tried to dismiss those facts with YOUR assumptions.
You ignore inconvenient facts as well.
For example, there’s also a little problem of putting him on a bus by 12:37 or so, and then taking a cab to his rooming house by “about one o’clock”. So explain how a bus transfer from McWatter’s bus wound up in Oswald’s possession, and how
Was everyone there all lying or mistaken as well? Flesh this out for us. What happens after Oswald leaves the TSBD at 12:45orthereafter, and how is he identified by Bledsoe on a bus and by Roberts at the roominghouse? Why do multiple witnesses pick himout of lineups as the person they saw in the vicinity of the Tippit murder?
Let us know what you’ve come up with so far.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 3:25:02 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 2:41:11 AM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 3:37:10 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Saturday, October 14, 2023 at 12:19:00 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
Said the pot to the kettle.More of your silly "this must mean this figuring". Almost invariably, for any piece of evidence thereYou have learned Trump's major lesson well--never admit it even when you're dead wrong and you know it.
are multiple possible explanations but you always gravitate towards the one that takes you
where you want to go, ignoring all other possibilities.
You're applying that aphorism to the wrong person. I used to think that Oswald wasn't the depository shooter, remember? I later admitted that I thought that he must have been.
Now, I predict that you won't admit you're wrong re pot/kettle...Why would I when I know I'm right?
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 12:23:09 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:stairway. What happened? Perhaps Vickie Adams...
On Sunday, October 15, 2023 at 6:58:01 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
The fact is the encounter took place in the 2nd floor lunchroom because there wasn't a
lunchroom on the 3rd of 4th floor.
Faulty logic. Baker does not mention a lunchroom in his 11/22 affidavit. "I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around & came back toward me." Early on 11/22, then, Baker has the encounter taking place on the
There were three people involved in the encounter and all three said it took place in the 2nd
floor lunchroom. But your silly figuring tells you it happened someplace else so you go with that.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT
floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
dcwtheir employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him? Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
Why would I when I know I'm right?
We covered that a month or so ago.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him? Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if ithad been mentioned.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if it
And yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcw
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if
talking to Sorrels. I guess that doesn't prove anything.And yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwThe way it works out, Marrion Baker had come into the Homicide office to make out his affidavit during the first Oswald interrogation, between 3:15 and 3:45. And he saw Oswald at 4:05 or so, according to Hosty's time, when he saw Oswald afterwards
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:55:56 AM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm == quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
was present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at leastThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and HostyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if
talking to Sorrels. I guess that doesn't prove anything.And yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwThe way it works out, Marrion Baker had come into the Homicide office to make out his affidavit during the first Oswald interrogation, between 3:15 and 3:45. And he saw Oswald at 4:05 or so, according to Hosty's time, when he saw Oswald afterwards
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
Baker's affidavit was taken in a small office where Oswald was being held awaiting the first interrogation.So what, Fuckface?
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him? Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to
what Oswald said, and his word is about as good as Fritz's & Bookhout's, which is to say not very. (Though Bookhout may not even have written that solo report--in his testimony, he states that the joint report was the only one done.)Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
Bookhout and Fritz wanted to make it seem as if Oswald endorsed the 2nd-floor encounter. He apparently did not. In a later interview Holmes reported (and made more specific) that Oswald said the encounter took place at the front door. But that's only
more important to them...== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
I was saying that Bookhout contradicted himself when in his solo report he said that Oswald met a cop on the 2nd floor. He and Hosty did not say anything about that in their joint report. It apparently slipped both their minds! The Coke was apparently
dcwto their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him? Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
Bookhout and Fritz wanted to make it seem as if Oswald endorsed the 2nd-floor encounter.
He apparently did not. In a later interview Holmes reported (and made more specific) that Oswald said the encounter took place at the front door.
But that's only what Oswald said,
and his word is about as good as Fritz's & Bookhout's, which is to say not very. (Though Bookhout may not even have written that solo report--in his testimony, he states that the joint report was the only one done.)
more important to them...== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
I was saying that Bookhout contradicted himself when in his solo report he said that Oswald met a cop on the 2nd floor. He and Hosty did not say anything about that in their joint report. It apparently slipped both their minds! The Coke was apparently
dcwto their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if it
And yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcw
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at least notThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and Hosty wasAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if
they had the right guy, an easy job if he really was guilty...as a member of the conspiracy. Baker never confirmed the Coke, even though it had been written in and crossed out in a hand-written version of one of his affidavits. The authorities probablyAnd yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwI think probably Bookhout did fudge it and commit fraud in order to tighten up the case against Oswald. But, that doesn't mean that the 2nd floor encounter did not happen. It just means that the authorities wanted to convince the American Saps that
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:16:25 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm == quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
was present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at leastThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and HostyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter if
they had the right guy, an easy job if he really was guilty...as a member of the conspiracy. Baker never confirmed the Coke, even though it had been written in and crossed out in a hand-written version of one of his affidavits. The authorities probablyAnd yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwI think probably Bookhout did fudge it and commit fraud in order to tighten up the case against Oswald. But, that doesn't mean that the 2nd floor encounter did not happen. It just means that the authorities wanted to convince the American Saps that
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
You are getting off the track. The two non-suspects involved are Truly and Baker. Both affirm in sworn testimony before the Commission the encounter happened after ascending at least one flight of stairs. They differ on which floor in variousstatements, but that is inconsequential. The second floor encounter happened, and there’s no reason to doubt that. What, therefore, did Bookhout “fudge”?
Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect, which, if you know anything aboutsuspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:31:38 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:16:25 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway,
excessive swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue;
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm == quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
was present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, at leastThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, and HostyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
if it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the encounter
they had the right guy, an easy job if he really was guilty...as a member of the conspiracy. Baker never confirmed the Coke, even though it had been written in and crossed out in a hand-written version of one of his affidavits. The authorities probablyAnd yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwI think probably Bookhout did fudge it and commit fraud in order to tighten up the case against Oswald. But, that doesn't mean that the 2nd floor encounter did not happen. It just means that the authorities wanted to convince the American Saps that
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
statements, but that is inconsequential. The second floor encounter happened, and there’s no reason to doubt that. What, therefore, did Bookhout “fudge”?You are getting off the track. The two non-suspects involved are Truly and Baker. Both affirm in sworn testimony before the Commission the encounter happened after ascending at least one flight of stairs. They differ on which floor in various
suspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful.Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect, which, if you know anything about
I don't need to ride on your "track." I'll say whatever I damn well please. Shit Bag.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:40:26 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:but our investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:31:38 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 2:16:25 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 11:50:19 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 10:20:37 PM UTC-7, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:20:56 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 9:15:27 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Monday, October 16, 2023 at 8:37:01 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 9:41:48 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway,
excessive swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue;
FRONT DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE
went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)So Roy Truly lied as well? He puts the encounter with the policeman on the second floor:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
== quote ==
Mr. BELIN. All right. Number 23, the arrow points to the door that has the glass in it.
Now, as you raced around, how far did you start up the stairs towards the third floor there?
Mr. TRULY. I suppose I was up two or three steps before I realized the officer wasn't following me.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. TRULY. I came back to the second floor landing.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I heard some voices, or a voice, coming from the area of the lunchroom, or the inside vestibule, the area of 24.
Mr. BELIN. All right. And I see that there appears to be on the second floor diagram, a room marked lunchroom.
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do then?
Mr. TRULY. I ran over and looked in this door No. 23.
Mr. BELIN. Through the glass, or was the door open?
Mr. TRULY. I don't know. I think I opened the door. I feel like I did. I don't remember.
Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?
Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.
Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?
Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see?
Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
== unquote ==
And the officer in question (Marrion Baker) lied as well? He puts the encounter with Oswald inside the building on the afternoon of the assassination:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
== quote ==
As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and
Almost verbatim what Insp. Sawyer's witness re a man running out the back of the building about 12:33 reported.
We covered that a month or so ago.
But returning to the subject at hand, did Truly, Baker, and Bookhout all lie to pit Oswald’s encounter with a policeman inside the building above the first floor, instead of at the front entrance?
== unquote ==
And James Bookhout of the FBI lied too, when he claimed in this memorandum for the record that Oswald admitted to this encounter with Truly and Baker in the lunchroom?Contradicting his earlier acquiescence in the Hosty-Bookhout report, which had Oswald simply fetching a soda from the 2nd floor, no encounter.
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0322a.htm
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That’s what you’re trying to suggest with the failure to mention the encounter. Isn’t it?
Mr. Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"dcw
Or is it your theory Oswald lied and Bookhout recorded that lie by Oswald?
It’s amazing how many people you have to accuse of lying to get the facts distorted into an account you prefer.
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by
Hosty was present for only one. Perhaps Bookhout's report is of another. Not that I would trust anything Bookhout said. Same for Truly or Fritz or Oswald. But Baker seems to be an honest agent in this matter. He does not toe the Official Story line, atThose names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
Also, the solo Bookhout report of the 22nd might refer to a different interview than the Hosty/Bookhout report. People seem to assume it is the same interview. But it looks like at least 3 different interviews were held on the 22nd, andAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
encounter if it had been mentioned.Well, Bookhout does say in his WC that he witnessed just the one interview on the 22nd. So his report, typed up after Oswald had been shot, was of the same interview with Hosty present. You would think that Hosty would have noted the
that they had the right guy, an easy job if he really was guilty...as a member of the conspiracy. Baker never confirmed the Coke, even though it had been written in and crossed out in a hand-written version of one of his affidavits. The authoritiesAnd yet he didn't, in the Hosty-Bookhout report, in his Commission testimony, and, much later, in his book.
Bookhout might have added that after Oswald was dead, either as a a lie or as an update based upon subsequent information.Either way, it's a fraud, presented as part of the account of the interview
dcwI think probably Bookhout did fudge it and commit fraud in order to tighten up the case against Oswald. But, that doesn't mean that the 2nd floor encounter did not happen. It just means that the authorities wanted to convince the American Saps
Oswald might not have volunteered the information and perhaps was later confronted with it. We have spotty coverage of the Day One interviews.
statements, but that is inconsequential. The second floor encounter happened, and there’s no reason to doubt that. What, therefore, did Bookhout “fudge”?You are getting off the track. The two non-suspects involved are Truly and Baker. Both affirm in sworn testimony before the Commission the encounter happened after ascending at least one flight of stairs. They differ on which floor in various
suspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful.Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect, which, if you know anything about
this thread.I don't need to ride on your "track." I'll say whatever I damn well please. Shit Bag.I’m just pointing out you should follow the evidence, not the hearsay. Ben likes to claim the critics “follow the evidence”, but I see precious little following of evidence and a whole lot of following the hearsay and a boatload of speculation in
Do you disagree with that assessment?I follow all the evidence, including hearsay, which might have some value. This is not a courtroom. This is the Nut House. All evidence is admissible here.
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
The clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
innocent guy for the assassination. I don’t understand how Oswald being stopped at the front door and his name taken had to be covered up or it would expose the conspiracy. Can you go into the argument for that in greater detail? Thanks in advance.The clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...Well, now you’ve got two encounters Oswald had with the police inside the building, on the second floor, and near the front door. Yet Oswald only mentions one of the two in his interrogations, or we’re back to the interrogators lying to frame an
Curiously, Oswald did mention an encounter with a LEO at the front door, but he apparently mistook a reporter for a Secret Service agent:I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and it
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:17:18 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and itmight have some value, and it might not.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:17:18 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
innocent guy for the assassination. I don’t understand how Oswald being stopped at the front door and his name taken had to be covered up or it would expose the conspiracy. Can you go into the argument for that in greater detail? Thanks in advance.The clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...Well, now you’ve got two encounters Oswald had with the police inside the building, on the second floor, and near the front door. Yet Oswald only mentions one of the two in his interrogations, or we’re back to the interrogators lying to frame an
might have some value, and it might not.Curiously, Oswald did mention an encounter with a LEO at the front door, but he apparently mistook a reporter for a Secret Service agent:I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and it
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:50:37 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:17:18 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
an innocent guy for the assassination. I don’t understand how Oswald being stopped at the front door and his name taken had to be covered up or it would expose the conspiracy. Can you go into the argument for that in greater detail? Thanks in advance.The clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...Well, now you’ve got two encounters Oswald had with the police inside the building, on the second floor, and near the front door. Yet Oswald only mentions one of the two in his interrogations, or we’re back to the interrogators lying to frame
might have some value, and it might not.Curiously, Oswald did mention an encounter with a LEO at the front door, but he apparently mistook a reporter for a Secret Service agent:I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and it
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm
Yes, I pointed that out above: “ Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect,which, if you know anything about suspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful. ”
Thanks for being agreeable for once.And thank you for being the asshole you always are...for once.
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 9:50:22 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:50:37 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:17:18 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
an innocent guy for the assassination. I don’t understand how Oswald being stopped at the front door and his name taken had to be covered up or it would expose the conspiracy. Can you go into the argument for that in greater detail? Thanks in advance.The clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...Well, now you’ve got two encounters Oswald had with the police inside the building, on the second floor, and near the front door. Yet Oswald only mentions one of the two in his interrogations, or we’re back to the interrogators lying to frame
it might have some value, and it might not.Curiously, Oswald did mention an encounter with a LEO at the front door, but he apparently mistook a reporter for a Secret Service agent:I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm
which, if you know anything about suspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful. ”Yes, I pointed that out above: “ Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect,
Thanks for being agreeable for once.And thank you for being the asshole you always are...for once.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 12:47:06 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 9:50:22 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:50:37 AM UTC-4, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 3:17:18 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 8:42:37 AM UTC-4, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2023 at 12:22:15 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 6:15:27 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant wrote:Only fools don't see the obvious in front of them even when it is explained...
On Tuesday, October 17, 2023 at 11:48:07 AM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
frame an innocent guy for the assassination. I don’t understand how Oswald being stopped at the front door and his name taken had to be covered up or it would expose the conspiracy. Can you go into the argument for that in greater detail? Thanks inThe clear answer to this is there were two stops...One in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and the other in the Lobby that was covered-up because of its circumstances of Lee and CIA Shelley were too dangerous to exposing the conspiracy...Well, now you’ve got two encounters Oswald had with the police inside the building, on the second floor, and near the front door. Yet Oswald only mentions one of the two in his interrogations, or we’re back to the interrogators lying to
it might have some value, and it might not.Curiously, Oswald did mention an encounter with a LEO at the front door, but he apparently mistook a reporter for a Secret Service agent:I'm sure you and Brian will have a wonderful discussion here and I don't mean to intervene. But I just want to point out that every single word we have from Oswald's police interrogations is hearsay. It is evidence admissible in the Nut House and
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm
which, if you know anything about suspects in general, or this one in particular, are NOT always truthful. ”Yes, I pointed that out above: “ Anything Bookhout wrote, or Hosty wrote, or Holmes testified to is all hearsay, and therefore further down the line from the actual witnesses to the encounter. It’s also parsing the supposed words of the suspect,
Now THAT’S a contradiction. Can you inform Don Willis of that?Thanks for being agreeable for once.And thank you for being the asshole you always are...for once.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogationsBAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT TO
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR - NOT
One problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has notimeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offense
That said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence".Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along with the
dcwtheir employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
McWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they thenconcocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room for
You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all that
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
---------step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
--------------a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he secured
Straight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew heneeded to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longer
Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along with theThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence".
There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.talking about Baker.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or hadlegitimate business being there.
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."
I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes, that doesn't mean that he was describing Oswald (roughly!), but everyone in Dealey picked up on that same description,
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.
And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for comedy.
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longerStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew he
. Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along withThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence"
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'dhave no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longerStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew he
. Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along withThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence"
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'dhave no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
dcw
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one." I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone
comedy.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here. And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longerStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew he
. Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along withThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence"
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'dhave no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible. But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
dcw
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:24:19 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one." I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone
comedy.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here. And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
d have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible. But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
dcw
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
exclusive. It could be the same man having two encounters, or two different men each having one encounter. It could even be that there was no 1st floor "Oswald" encounter. That's just the way the evidence is.Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
This is a charming little exchange you have going here! I would just like to interject for the sake of the Dear Mythical Lurker that the question of the 1st floor encounter has nothing to do with the 2nd floor encounter. The two are not mutuallyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 4:44:26 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:24:19 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
no timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of theOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has
running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one." I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone
comedy.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here. And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for
then concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy aMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and toldMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper
me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
have taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should
she'd have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible. But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
dcw
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly
exclusive. It could be the same man having two encounters, or two different men each having one encounter. It could even be that there was no 1st floor "Oswald" encounter. That's just the way the evidence is.Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
This is a charming little exchange you have going here! I would just like to interject for the sake of the Dear Mythical Lurker that the question of the 1st floor encounter has nothing to do with the 2nd floor encounter. The two are not mutuallyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
The two certainly are mutually exclusive. We know from 1st day notes that Oswald never said anything about being stopped by a cop in the 2nd floor lunch room. The cops and Truly wanted the 1st floor encounter to disappear and be replaced by themythical 2nd floor one. To that end, the put words in the mouth of the dead man and Truly attempts to relocate the vestibule Oswald said the encounter happened in, to the 2nd floor
A discussion about vestibule doors at the Main St entrance of the DPD. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=47#relPageId=171We don't "know" what Oswald said, you fucking idiot. We only know the hearsay accounts of 5 officials of what he said, the same officials you say railroaded Oswald. You're so incredibly stupid.
Holmes explaining that Oswald was talking about a vestibule at the front entrance - where they atre always located. www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=41#relPageId=316
Sylvia Odio talking about a vestibule on the ground floor of her apartment building
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1212#relPageId=29
Discussing a vestibule to the office in the police basement https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1212#relPageId=29
The TSBD had the only upper floor vestibule in Dallas. But I'm betting the only one anywhere,
By definition, derived from the etymological roots, it is an area near the front entrance of a building. It is from the Latin "vestibulum" meaning the space in front of the main entrance of a classical Roman or Greek building.
Those cunts were desperate when they pulled that shit moving it up a floor.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 4:44:26 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:24:19 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Those cunts were desperate when they pulled that shit moving it up a floor...
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 8:35:44 AM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 4:44:26 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:24:19 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Those cunts were desperate when they pulled that shit moving it up a floor...
All you are seeing here is a person with a congenitally defective need to revise the evidence in order to get it to say what he wants...In the quote Greg posts from Holmes you can see Holmes confirming the soda machine that was located on the 2nd Floor...Greg is a blowhard and bullshit artist who is spoiled because he uses cowardly banning on his ROKC troll farm to have the only unchallenged word...That is why he thinks he can get away with ignoring and failing to respond to the fact that there is a
This ridiculous person and research community disrupting troll Greg Parker needs to be removed from the research community instead of being allowed to corrupt good research with his trolling proxies who ignore the correct evidence...Holmes was a PostalInspector so he was outside the loop at the Dallas Police Station...Because Holmes came from a different orbit he wasn't prone to the gag orders given to the other Police and FBI personnel so he wasn't aware that he had a serious case of loose lips
Anyone who watches Kamp's videos with Blunt can see that Blunt is well aware Kamp is a horse's ass...
Sandy Larsen needs to be removed from moderator because any fool can see the plaid pattern of Lovelady's sleeve in the clear Groden copies...Cinque level research and moderation is protected by the horse's ass, incompetent, and ignoramus Gordon...
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 8:35:44 AM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 4:44:26 PM UTC+11, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:24:19 PM UTC-4, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
has no timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of theOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit
running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one." I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone
comedy.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here. And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for
then concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy aMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they
That seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J.
information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and toldMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper
me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
knew he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald couldStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
is talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he
have taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should
she'd have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when
had legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible. But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...
dcw
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
Truly as to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr.
exclusive. It could be the same man having two encounters, or two different men each having one encounter. It could even be that there was no 1st floor "Oswald" encounter. That's just the way the evidence is.Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
This is a charming little exchange you have going here! I would just like to interject for the sake of the Dear Mythical Lurker that the question of the 1st floor encounter has nothing to do with the 2nd floor encounter. The two are not mutuallyAnd please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
mythical 2nd floor one. To that end, the put words in the mouth of the dead man and Truly attempts to relocate the vestibule Oswald said the encounter happened in, to the 2nd floorThe two certainly are mutually exclusive. We know from 1st day notes that Oswald never said anything about being stopped by a cop in the 2nd floor lunch room. The cops and Truly wanted the 1st floor encounter to disappear and be replaced by the
A discussion about vestibule doors at the Main St entrance of the DPD. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=47#relPageId=171
Holmes explaining that Oswald was talking about a vestibule at the front entrance - where they atre always located. www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=41#relPageId=316
Sylvia Odio talking about a vestibule on the ground floor of her apartment building
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1212#relPageId=29
Discussing a vestibule to the office in the police basement https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1212#relPageId=29
The TSBD had the only upper floor vestibule in Dallas. But I'm betting the only one anywhere,
By definition, derived from the etymological roots, it is an area near the front entrance of a building. It is from the Latin "vestibulum" meaning the space in front of the main entrance of a classical Roman or Greek building.
Those cunts were desperate when they pulled that shit moving it up a floor.We don't "know" what Oswald said, you fucking idiot. We only know the hearsay accounts of 5 officials of what he said, the same officials you say railroaded Oswald. You're so incredibly stupid.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
McWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they thenconcocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room for
You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all that
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
---------step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
--------------a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he secured
Straight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew heneeded to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longer
Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along with theThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence".
There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.talking about Baker.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom.
No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should havetaken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.
But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or hadlegitimate business being there.
So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"
Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as to
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:59:25 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the palms of"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive swallowing;
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.So you dispute the testimony of McWatters, Bledsoe, AND Whaley?
What about Earlene Roberts (who said Oswald arrived at the rooming house about one o’clock)?
Do you dispute her testimony as well?
What about the bus transfer found on Oswald after his arrest attesting to him riding McWatters bus to the exclusion of all other buses in the world?
Was that a forgery and planted on Oswald?
Was everyone lying to frame Oswald?
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatYou also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could no longerStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew he
. Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT go along withThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day Evidence"
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
that means he couldn’t be the shooter. You’re now removing what critics originally claimed was Oswald alibi!The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom.
This is more than a little funny. The Baker/Truly story was originally portrayed by critics as Oswald‘s alibi - he couldn’t get to the second floor in time to be seen by Baker and Truly if he was the shooter —according to the original critics
Good job.
No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.You are ignoring the fact that the nearby stairs only went to the second floor, and it was the back stairwell in the NW corner that went all the way up. And Baker couldn’t know that.
I pointed this out above. Keep ignoring it.
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
to their employment.*** "HE'S OKAY - HE WORKS HERE"So. No. It happened when it happened. If that was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting, it was 15 or 20 minutes after the shooting.
Bo amount of arm waving, no amount of claiming Oswald was psychic, no amount of conflating, no amount of wrong assumptions will ever change that.
dcw
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=435 (go to the bottom and on to the next page)
"as each office and floor was cleared, the employees were cleared by Kaminski and Mr Truly, manager of the firm, at the front door where there names, addresses and telephone numbers were written down, ***and they were identified by Mr. Truly as
Those names and addresses were later typed up. Whose name appears at the very top with the old Elsbeth address?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
Who had only one ID with an address on it to show Kaminski?
Say it with me now... Lee Oswald
What IID was that and what address did it show?
Say it with me now.... his library card with the old Elsbeth address.
And please please please quote me correctly and in context on your website. Thank you.
Sienzantinvestigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Gesundheit!
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:59:25 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
I dispute the interpretation of McWatters testimony.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.So you dispute the testimony of McWatters, Bledsoe, AND Whaley?
I dispute the identification of Oswald by Blesdoe and that he ever boarded with her. I don't don't young Milton made her suspicious he was the culprit though.
What about Earlene Roberts (who said Oswald arrived at the rooming house about one o’clock)?Earlene was a confabulator who could not help confabulating according to her employer. I don't doubt someone rushed in and grabbed a jacket. I doubt it was Oswald or that it happened on that day.
Do you dispute her testimony as well?You want to believe a confabulator because it suits your faith, go right ahead.
What about the bus transfer found on Oswald after his arrest attesting to him riding McWatters bus to the exclusion of all other buses in the world?How long after the arrest was it "found"? IIRC, it was not found until after McWatters bus was pulled up outside...
Was that a forgery and planted on Oswald?Not a forgery. You're being a silly-billy full of hanky-panky.
Was everyone lying to frame Oswald?Everyone wanted to help those nice police because everyone knew the nice police only ever grab the bad guys.
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatYou also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
that means he couldn’t be the shooter. You’re now removing what critics originally claimed was Oswald alibi!The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom.
This is more than a little funny. The Baker/Truly story was originally portrayed by critics as Oswald‘s alibi - he couldn’t get to the second floor in time to be seen by Baker and Truly if he was the shooter —according to the original critics
DO WITH ME. It was INCRIMINATING, not exculatory.Good job.Yep. Get rid of the crap no matter where or who it came from. That is what you do when you want the facts.
The WC and FBI spoilt the claims of those hapless critics with their time trials showing it was at least theoretically possible for Oswald to get there in the time allowed. It was never an alibi, despite past claims of people who btw HAVE FUCK ALL TO
And you are ignoring that once shown those stairs, he needed no one to show him how to get to the top of them. Let alone need someone to act as a human shield.No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.You are ignoring the fact that the nearby stairs only went to the second floor, and it was the back stairwell in the NW corner that went all the way up. And Baker couldn’t know that.
I pointed this out above. Keep ignoring it.LOL. I don't live on this forum like you guys and I am one person facing a deluge of unhappy campers from both sides of the picket fence.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 8:21:36 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
Sienzant
Gesundheit!
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 7:59:25 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
no timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of theOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has
"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
I dispute the interpretation of McWatters testimony.There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.So you dispute the testimony of McWatters, Bledsoe, AND Whaley?
I dispute the identification of Oswald by Blesdoe and that he ever boarded with her. I don't don't young Milton made her suspicious he was the culprit though.
What about Earlene Roberts (who said Oswald arrived at the rooming house about one o’clock)?Earlene was a confabulator who could not help confabulating according to her employer. I don't doubt someone rushed in and grabbed a jacket. I doubt it was Oswald or that it happened on that day.
Do you dispute her testimony as well?You want to believe a confabulator because it suits your faith, go right ahead.
All the arrows aren't going to point in the same wrong direction. All the arrows point to Oswald.
Therefore that is not the wrong direction.
him as the shooter.
transfer in Oswald's pocket.
leave the bus.
together.
off the bus because the traffic wasn't moving, went on foot to where he got in Whaley's cab to
Oak Cliff, entered the rooming house where he fetched his revolver and light colored jacket,
traveled on foot to 10th and Patton where he was stopped by Tippit, shot and killed Tippit, fled
the scene to the Texas Theater where he was finally arrested. The forensic evidence and the
eyewitness accounts ALL support this scenario. If the evidence could be made to fit an
alternative scenario, it would have been done by now. Anyone who chooses to dispute Oswald
was the murderer of both Kennedy and Tippit is forced to explain away the evidence because
they cannot make the evidence fit Oswald's innocence.
Explaining away evidence, if not directly, by innuendo.What about the bus transfer found on Oswald after his arrest attesting to him riding McWatters bus to the exclusion of all other buses in the world?How long after the arrest was it "found"? IIRC, it was not found until after McWatters bus was pulled up outside...
So your innuendo is all those witnesses lied. Explaining them away because their accountsWas that a forgery and planted on Oswald?Not a forgery. You're being a silly-billy full of hanky-panky.
Was everyone lying to frame Oswald?Everyone wanted to help those nice police because everyone knew the nice police only ever grab the bad guys.
don't fit your preferred narrative that Oswald was framed.
then concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy aMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they
information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and toldYou also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper
me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
that means he couldn’t be the shooter. You’re now removing what critics originally claimed was Oswald alibi!The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom.
This is more than a little funny. The Baker/Truly story was originally portrayed by critics as Oswald‘s alibi - he couldn’t get to the second floor in time to be seen by Baker and Truly if he was the shooter —according to the original critics
DO WITH ME. It was INCRIMINATING, not exculatory.Good job.Yep. Get rid of the crap no matter where or who it came from. That is what you do when you want the facts.
The WC and FBI spoilt the claims of those hapless critics with their time trials showing it was at least theoretically possible for Oswald to get there in the time allowed. It was never an alibi, despite past claims of people who btw HAVE FUCK ALL TO
Baker did not know the layout of the building. Having the manager with him would be a valuableAnd you are ignoring that once shown those stairs, he needed no one to show him how to get to the top of them. Let alone need someone to act as a human shield.No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.You are ignoring the fact that the nearby stairs only went to the second floor, and it was the back stairwell in the NW corner that went all the way up. And Baker couldn’t know that.
resource.
I pointed this out above. Keep ignoring it.LOL. I don't live on this forum like you guys and I am one person facing a deluge of unhappy campers from both sides of the picket fence.
That should tell you something.
Sienzant
What about Earlene Roberts (who said Oswald arrived at the rooming house about one o’clock)?Earlene was a confabulator who could not help confabulating according to her employer. I don't doubt someone rushed in and grabbed a jacket. I doubt it was Oswald or that it happened on that day.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 8:21:36 PM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:16:56 AM UTC+11, Brian Doyle wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 8:35:44 AM UTC-4, Greg Parker wrote:
Brian, mate, you are going to burst a blood vessel. Don't do it to yourself.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 1:24:19 PM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes, that doesn't mean that he was describing Oswald (roughly!), but everyone in Dealey picked up on that same description,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."Trust no one when it comes to a man being framed, until you can find independent support.
I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (
Help me get to your page. Do you believe the person seen leaving at 12:33 was Oswald?
like the man, because the rest of them were larger men than--There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.Absolutely no take backs. He said he picked Oswald as looking most like Milton.
Mr. BALL - Who was the No. 2 man you saw in the lineup on November 22, 1963? Mr. McWATTERS - Well, just like I say, he was the shortest man in the lineup, in other words, when they brought these men out there, in other words, he was about the shortest, and the lightest weight one, I guess, was the reason I say that he looked
Mr. BALL - Well, now, at that time, when you saw the lineup--
Mr. McWATTERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Were you under the impression that this man that you saw in the lineup and whom you pointed out to the police, was the teenage boy who had been grinning?
Mr. McWATTERS - I was, yes, sir; I was under the impression--
Elsewhere he explains that he now knew who the teenage boy was because he had become a regular passenger.
Oswald was not on that bus.
And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for comedy.If he was actually on McWatters bus and stayed on it, he gets to Oak Cliff at 1:20? Does that bus go via Irving?
I just checked. I know it is a different era and different traffic conditions but to get specifically to the Texas Theatre from 411 Elm, by combination foot and bus, ranges from 15 to 18 minutes.
One of three routes
10:44 PM - 11:00 PM (16 min)
411 Elm St
Dallas, TX 75202, USA
WalkWalk
About 2 min, 377 ft
10:46 PM
Houston @ Main - S - NS
Bus47Wheatland
9 min (9 stops) · Stop ID: 20934
10:55 PM
Beckley @ Jefferson - S - FS
WalkWalk
About 5 min, 0.2 mi
11:00 PM
Texas Theatre
231 Jefferson Blvd, Dallas, TX 75208, United States -------------------------------
If he left when I believe he did, and goes direct to the TT by bus and foot, he gets there somewhere between 1:05 and 1:15 at the outside, taking into account possible delays.
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
Well then, you have overthought it. Walk it back.and Jarman so no. End of story. We only know what Oswald really said because Bookhout's solo report states: "Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly
Oswald is talking about this at the very first interrogation. Jarman and Norman had not given statements at that time. It was a problem for the cops. They got around it by claiming Oswald said he had lunch with them. They asked Jarman if this was true
So he ate alone and only saw them walk through "the room" - which has to be a reference to the whole 1st floor being a storage room.where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all that
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
d have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'
Maybe coincidence, maybe not. There are more similarities than discrepancies between Baker's man, your man, Brenan's man and the description given of Lee by Marguerite in 1960. None are Oswald in any more than a generic sense, although I thinkMarguerite was just shit at guessing height and weight.
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.Possible? It is what the document says he was there for!
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...See above. It gets him there no later than 1:15 allowing for bus delays. And that is to the theatre itself, not just Oak Cliff. And what "assignment" are you talking about?
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 1:24:19 PM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT DOOR -
timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of the offenseOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has no
outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes, that doesn't mean that he was describing Oswald (roughly!), but everyone in Dealey picked up on that same description,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."Trust no one when it comes to a man being framed, until you can find independent support.
I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one (
Help me get to your page. Do you believe the person seen leaving at 12:33 was Oswald? If so, the front door scenario with Truly and Kaminski knocks that on the head.like the man, because the rest of them were larger men than--
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.Absolutely no take backs. He said he picked Oswald as looking most like Milton.
Mr. BALL - Who was the No. 2 man you saw in the lineup on November 22, 1963? Mr. McWATTERS - Well, just like I say, he was the shortest man in the lineup, in other words, when they brought these men out there, in other words, he was about the shortest, and the lightest weight one, I guess, was the reason I say that he looked
Mr. BALL - Well, now, at that time, when you saw the lineup--
Mr. McWATTERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Were you under the impression that this man that you saw in the lineup and whom you pointed out to the police, was the teenage boy who had been grinning?
Mr. McWATTERS - I was, yes, sir; I was under the impression--
Elsewhere he explains that he now knew who the teenage boy was because he had become a regular passenger.
Oswald was not on that bus.
And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for comedy.If he was actually on McWatters bus and stayed on it, he gets to Oak Cliff at 1:20? Does that bus go via Irving?
I just checked. I know it is a different era and different traffic conditions but to get specifically to the Texas Theatre from 411 Elm, by combination foot and bus, ranges from 15 to 18 minutes.
One of three routes
10:44 PM - 11:00 PM (16 min)
411 Elm St
Dallas, TX 75202, USA
WalkWalk
About 2 min, 377 ft
10:46 PM
Houston @ Main - S - NS
Bus47Wheatland
9 min (9 stops) · Stop ID: 20934
10:55 PM
Beckley @ Jefferson - S - FS
WalkWalk
About 5 min, 0.2 mi
11:00 PM
Texas Theatre
231 Jefferson Blvd, Dallas, TX 75208, United States -------------------------------
If he left when I believe he did, and goes direct to the TT by bus and foot, he gets there somewhere between 1:05 and 1:15 at the outside, taking into account possible delays.
concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy a room forMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they then
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
Well then, you have overthought it. Walk it back.
Oswald is talking about this at the very first interrogation.
So he ate alone and only saw them walk through "the room" - which has to be a reference to the whole 1st floor being a storage room.
where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all thatMr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information
to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should have
d have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when she'
Maybe coincidence, maybe not. There are more similarities than discrepancies between Baker's man, your man, Brenan's man and the description given of Lee by Marguerite in 1960. None are Oswald in any more than a generic sense, although I thinkMarguerite was just shit at guessing height and weight.
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.Possible? It is what the document says he was there for!
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...See above. It gets him there no later than 1:15 allowing for bus delays. And that is to the theatre itself, not just Oak Cliff. And what "assignment" are you talking about?
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 9:11:06 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 1:24:19 PM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
no timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of theOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit has
(outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes, that doesn't mean that he was describing Oswald (roughly!), but everyone in Dealey picked up on that same description,"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."Trust no one when it comes to a man being framed, until you can find independent support.
I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no one
like the man, because the rest of them were larger men than--Help me get to your page. Do you believe the person seen leaving at 12:33 was Oswald? If so, the front door scenario with Truly and Kaminski knocks that on the head.
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.Absolutely no take backs. He said he picked Oswald as looking most like Milton.
Mr. BALL - Who was the No. 2 man you saw in the lineup on November 22, 1963?
Mr. McWATTERS - Well, just like I say, he was the shortest man in the lineup, in other words, when they brought these men out there, in other words, he was about the shortest, and the lightest weight one, I guess, was the reason I say that he looked
second* feature, which fits nicely with the running time of the former (99 minutes). Of course, then, we're making liars of Whaley and Roberts. Oh--they already were...Mr. BALL - Well, now, at that time, when you saw the lineup--
Mr. McWATTERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Were you under the impression that this man that you saw in the lineup and whom you pointed out to the police, was the teenage boy who had been grinning?
Mr. McWATTERS - I was, yes, sir; I was under the impression--
Elsewhere he explains that he now knew who the teenage boy was because he had become a regular passenger.
Oswald was not on that bus.
And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for comedy.If he was actually on McWatters bus and stayed on it, he gets to Oak Cliff at 1:20? Does that bus go via Irving?
I just checked. I know it is a different era and different traffic conditions but to get specifically to the Texas Theatre from 411 Elm, by combination foot and bus, ranges from 15 to 18 minutes.
One of three routes
10:44 PM - 11:00 PM (16 min)
411 Elm St
Dallas, TX 75202, USA
WalkWalk
About 2 min, 377 ft
10:46 PM
Houston @ Main - S - NS
Bus47Wheatland
9 min (9 stops) · Stop ID: 20934
10:55 PM
Beckley @ Jefferson - S - FS
WalkWalk
About 5 min, 0.2 mi
11:00 PM
Texas TheatreI think that that works for me. I have delineated how the doors were open quite early that day, with an unscheduled extra showing of "Cry of Battle": Witness George Applin stated that when the cops came in at the start of "War Is Hell", it was the *
231 Jefferson Blvd, Dallas, TX 75208, United States -------------------------------
If he left when I believe he did, and goes direct to the TT by bus and foot, he gets there somewhere between 1:05 and 1:15 at the outside, taking into account possible delays.
then concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy aMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they
seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J. That
of over-thinking!) Of course that scenario ignores that Truly testified that he saw them *crossing* Houston...Well then, you have overthought it. Walk it back.Tempting. I remember that, at the time, Bud (or was it Joe Zircon, who has another name now) wriggled out of that by hypothesizing that Oswald looked down from the "nest" and saw N&J going around the Elm/Houston corner and worked from that. (Speaking
My own current, much-debated or -derided take on all this is that Norman & Jarman were not even in the building during the noon hour, that they had already left, with Givens, to watch the motorcade from elsewhere. Upshot: virtually invisible in thedowntown crowd, they could then be enlisted as 5th-floor "witnesses" in order to confirm Williams' story. But I think that only No True Flags and I hold that the depository shooting was from the 5th floor, and even there we don't quite agree on the
really said because Bookhout's solo report states: "Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during thisOswald is talking about this at the very first interrogation.I do not trust, at all, now, Bookhout's maintaining that he was talking about it.
Jarman and Norman had not given statements at that time. It was a problem for the cops. They got around it by claiming Oswald said he had lunch with them. They asked Jarman if this was true and Jarman so no. End of story. We only know what Oswald
information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and toldSo he ate alone and only saw them walk through "the room" - which has to be a reference to the whole 1st floor being a storage room.OK. My earlier self agrees with that, but...
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper
me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald could noStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who knew
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he is
have taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should
she'd have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when
Marguerite was just shit at guessing height and weight.Maybe coincidence, maybe not. There are more similarities than discrepancies between Baker's man, your man, Brenan's man and the description given of Lee by Marguerite in 1960. None are Oswald in any more than a generic sense, although I think
Seems like everyone was here, though they all agreed on the *wrong* stats... (OK, they got the height more or less right.)
legitimate business being there.But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or had
If, as I maintain now, Oswald was not just a patsy, but part of the conspiracy (in Dealey, but not Oak Cliff), he was not just watching a movie there...So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.Possible? It is what the document says he was there for!
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...See above. It gets him there no later than 1:15 allowing for bus delays. And that is to the theatre itself, not just Oak Cliff. And what "assignment" are you talking about?
dcw
On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 1:17:00 PM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:investigation shows that he actually saw him in a lunchroom, a little lunchroom where they were eating, and he held his gun on this man and Mr. Truly told him that he worked there, and the officer let him go.
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 9:11:06 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 1:24:19 PM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 4:59:25 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 7:33:05 AM UTC+11, Donald Willis wrote:
On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 6:41:48 PM UTC-7, Greg Parker wrote:
Mr. BALL. At that time didn't you know that one of your officers, Baker, had seen Oswald on the second floor?
Mr. FRITZ. They told me about that down at the bookstore; I believe Mr. Truly or someone told me about it, told me they had met him--I think he told me, person who told me about, I believe told me that they met him on the stairway, but our
swallowing; respiratory changes; muscle spasms; licking of the lips; thickened and blurred speech; *****stuttering****; darting eye movements; rigidity of the body; the 'playing' of the hands with each other; clenched fists; and cold, clammy sweat in the"Told me about that...," Mr Truly or someone told me about it...." "Told me they met him...." "I Think he told me..." "person who told me about..." "I believe told me...." THis is called STUTTERING. Fritz did not USUALLY stutter.
What do police look for when evaluating the truthfulness of a witness? Well, one of the things they look for is stuttering when that is not the person's usual speech pattern.
"The indicators of lying include perspiration flow; flushing or paleness of the skin; pulse rate increase or decrease which is apparent from the appearance of visible veins in the head, neck, and throat; dry mouth and tongue; excessive
DOOR - NOT TO BAKER ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN SOME ALTERNATE UNIVERSE.https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/nonverbal-communications-interrogations
Nowhere else in any testimony or interview is Fritz known to have stuttered. But on the question of the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, he stuttered like Don Knotts in "The Shakiest Gun in the West".
Fritz was lying his ass off.
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right. , >
And that was the truth. He was stopped by Truly and Det. Kaminski at the front door.
As this document shows, they were stationed there to vet those leaving. Truly specifically had to verify to Kaminski that the person leaving was an employee.... thus his famous line "He's okay. He works here". SAID TO KAMINKI AT THE FRONT
has no timeline. For an idea of the time, we go to Det. Turner's Report on Officer's Duties in Regards to the President's Murder. (CE 2003 p248): "In a couple of minutes Chief Lumpkin, Det. Senkel, the Army Major, and I proceeded to the location of theOne problem with this scenario. From Stevenson Exh. 5053: "At that time Lumpkin entered the building & instructed that it be completely sealed off... Lt. Erich Kaminski was placed on the inner door of the building..." The Stevenson Exhibit
one (outside LNs, that is) believed Brennan was his witness. But it's satisfying to have finally found out who, roughly, it was. OK, yes, that doesn't mean that he was describing Oswald (roughly!), but everyone in Dealey picked up on that same"Must have"? Why" Because the DPD, FBI and WC said so?
Forget the WC. It was stuck with what the DPD, the FBI, & the SS fed it. You sound like Fox Mulder: "Trust no one."Trust no one when it comes to a man being framed, until you can find independent support.
I pretty much believe his credo too. But I do believe Insp. Sawyer's long-lost 12:44 suspect-description witness, who saw someone running out of the building about 12:33. I believe it because his ID was so aggressively deep-sixed. Of course, no
looked like the man, because the rest of them were larger men than--Help me get to your page. Do you believe the person seen leaving at 12:33 was Oswald? If so, the front door scenario with Truly and Kaminski knocks that on the head.
There are no witnesses to him leaving at the that time. It relies entirely on the spurious assessment of McWatters' testimony, and the acceptance of Bledsoe and Whaley as reliable witnesses.
Oh, but I like going with McWatters--if Oswald was on his bus, he stayed on it--McW ID'd him in an official lineup. No take-backs here.Absolutely no take backs. He said he picked Oswald as looking most like Milton.
Mr. BALL - Who was the No. 2 man you saw in the lineup on November 22, 1963?
Mr. McWATTERS - Well, just like I say, he was the shortest man in the lineup, in other words, when they brought these men out there, in other words, he was about the shortest, and the lightest weight one, I guess, was the reason I say that he
second* feature, which fits nicely with the running time of the former (99 minutes). Of course, then, we're making liars of Whaley and Roberts. Oh--they already were...Mr. BALL - Well, now, at that time, when you saw the lineup--
Mr. McWATTERS - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Were you under the impression that this man that you saw in the lineup and whom you pointed out to the police, was the teenage boy who had been grinning?
Mr. McWATTERS - I was, yes, sir; I was under the impression--
Elsewhere he explains that he now knew who the teenage boy was because he had become a regular passenger.
Oswald was not on that bus.
And that puts Oswald in Oak Cliff no earlier than about 1:20. Whaley is one of my favorite witnesses, too--for comedy.If he was actually on McWatters bus and stayed on it, he gets to Oak Cliff at 1:20? Does that bus go via Irving?
I just checked. I know it is a different era and different traffic conditions but to get specifically to the Texas Theatre from 411 Elm, by combination foot and bus, ranges from 15 to 18 minutes.
One of three routes
10:44 PM - 11:00 PM (16 min)
411 Elm St
Dallas, TX 75202, USA
WalkWalk
About 2 min, 377 ft
10:46 PM
Houston @ Main - S - NS
Bus47Wheatland
9 min (9 stops) · Stop ID: 20934
10:55 PM
Beckley @ Jefferson - S - FS
WalkWalk
About 5 min, 0.2 mi
11:00 PM
Texas TheatreI think that that works for me. I have delineated how the doors were open quite early that day, with an unscheduled extra showing of "Cry of Battle": Witness George Applin stated that when the cops came in at the start of "War Is Hell", it was the *
231 Jefferson Blvd, Dallas, TX 75208, United States -------------------------------
If he left when I believe he did, and goes direct to the TT by bus and foot, he gets there somewhere between 1:05 and 1:15 at the outside, taking into account possible delays.
then concocted the bullshit story for her that she knew him as a former tenant. That negated the need to have her view a lineup. And Whaley? His testimony paints a picture of his rider being a drunk coming off a binge and having enough money to buy aMcWatters thought he was there to ID the person Mary's son Porter reported her as believing to be the assassin, based on his reaction on the bus to the news. That person was Milton Jones. They knew Mary was a hopeless witness which is why they
That seemed to let O off the hook. But the more I thought about it, the more I began to feel that that was just a set-up from the interviews, setting O up to have supposedly another lie.You also now need Oswald to be psychic - depicting the scene at the front door exactly as it was - only 15 or 20 minutes after he supposedly left.
As I've said, I don't believe implicitly in any of the sightings of Oswald during the noon hour. I think I was one of the first ones to foreground the Norman-Jarman/Oswald 1st-floor circa 12:25 story. A sort of reverse-sighting, Oswald of N&J.
of over-thinking!) Of course that scenario ignores that Truly testified that he saw them *crossing* Houston...Well then, you have overthought it. Walk it back.Tempting. I remember that, at the time, Bud (or was it Joe Zircon, who has another name now) wriggled out of that by hypothesizing that Oswald looked down from the "nest" and saw N&J going around the Elm/Houston corner and worked from that. (Speaking
downtown crowd, they could then be enlisted as 5th-floor "witnesses" in order to confirm Williams' story. But I think that only No True Flags and I hold that the depository shooting was from the 5th floor, and even there we don't quite agree on theMy own current, much-debated or -derided take on all this is that Norman & Jarman were not even in the building during the noon hour, that they had already left, with Givens, to watch the motorcade from elsewhere. Upshot: virtually invisible in the
really said because Bookhout's solo report states: "Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during thisOswald is talking about this at the very first interrogation.I do not trust, at all, now, Bookhout's maintaining that he was talking about it.
Jarman and Norman had not given statements at that time. It was a problem for the cops. They got around it by claiming Oswald said he had lunch with them. They asked Jarman if this was true and Jarman so no. End of story. We only know what Oswald
information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and toldSo he ate alone and only saw them walk through "the room" - which has to be a reference to the whole 1st floor being a storage room.OK. My earlier self agrees with that, but...
Mr. BALL - Had the police officers come in there and talked to you? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; they come in and talked to all of us. They asked us to show our proper identification, and then they had us to write our name down and who to get in touch with if they wanted to see us.
----------
Mr. BALL - At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper
me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later.---------
Mr. HOLMES ....a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told
secured a transfer and thereafter transferred to other buses to get to his destination."--------------
From Kelley's interrogation report: "In response to questions put by Captain Fritz, Oswald said that immediately after having left the building where he worked, he went by bus to the theater where he was arrested; that when he go on the bus he
knew he needed to be careful what he said until he got a lawyer, nevertheless just kept admitting to lying about how he left the building, further incriminating himself each time. Which is absolute bullshit. The reports were typed up AFTER Oswald couldStraight from the TSBD to the TT via 2 or more buses. Yes, Kelley does later have Oswald incriminating himself by saying that was a lie and he really got off the bus and caught a cab to his alleged boarding house. The evil genius Oswald, who
Evidence". Additionally, the 11/22 Hosty-Bookhout report on the first interview ALSO fails to mention a lunchroom confrontation. That does not necessarily mean that it didn't happen--despite the many problems--but it does mean that Oswald did NOT goThat said, I have to add that there are MANY problems with the second-floor scenario, not the least of which is that Baker fails even to mention the 2nd-floor lunchroom in both his 11/22 affidavit, and in his contribution to "JFK First Day
is talking about Baker.There was a lot of conflating going on, by design or incompetence.
A lot of tricky answers at the WC hearings as well.
Exhibit A: Fritz
Mr. BALL. Did you question Oswald about that? ["that" being stopped by a cop and Mr. Truly]
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I asked him about that and he knew that the officer stopped him all right.
That is a truthful but still misleading answer. Of course Oswald knew he was stopped by a cop. It happened at the front door. The cop was not Baker. It was Kaminski. Oswald was not making any secret of that encounter at the front door.
One of the issues that cause so much much fucked up bullshit and misunderstanding and misinformation is that Oswald did not know any of the officers names. So when he talks of being stopped by a cop and Truly - every man and his dog assumes he
have taken out his notepad and taken a name and advised the person not to leave the building until an officer can speak to him.The whole Truly / Baker story is fabricated from top to bottom. No cop - no 5 year old - needs someone to show them the way to the top of a building via stairs. No cop uses a civilian to lead the way in a search for an armed assassin.
In the context of this bullshit search, we have to believe Baker had some reason for suspicion of the person he glimpsed and then stopped. How then is that suspicion allayed by the fact that he was an employee? At the very least, Baker should
she'd have no reason to be stopping to watch him. Spellbound by nothing. Methinks they doth attest too much. Another reason maybe to question the Baker story is, as I noted, that his ID of Oswald is almost exactly Sawyer's witness's ID. Coincidence?Very good. More reasons not to believe the Truly/Baker story, as testified to, somewhat too painstakingly, by both. They're almost too precise, too detailed, like Mrs Markham at the other end, on intently watching "Oswald" before he shoots, when
Marguerite was just shit at guessing height and weight.Maybe coincidence, maybe not. There are more similarities than discrepancies between Baker's man, your man, Brenan's man and the description given of Lee by Marguerite in 1960. None are Oswald in any more than a generic sense, although I think
hadSeems like everyone was here, though they all agreed on the *wrong* stats... (OK, they got the height more or less right.)
But in the context of Truly and Kaminski at the front door, the words" he's okay. He works here" make perfect sense. The Bachelor report makes clear that Truly's role at the front door was to verify to Kaminski that the person worked there or
legitimate business being there.
If, as I maintain now, Oswald was not just a patsy, but part of the conspiracy (in Dealey, but not Oak Cliff), he was not just watching a movie there...So, then, Truly vetted everyone in like manner--"He's OK/She's OK"? Possible.Possible? It is what the document says he was there for!
But it's getting awfully late, by 12:50 or so, for Oswald to get to his Texas Theatre assignation...See above. It gets him there no later than 1:15 allowing for bus delays. And that is to the theatre itself, not just Oak Cliff. And what "assignment" are you talking about?
dcwYeah, he really was watching a movie Don.
Here is why he went to Oak Cliff where he was NOT living.
Mrs. PAINE - He did give her, I think, $10, just prior, or some time close to the time of the assassination, because she planned to buy some shoes.
Mr. JENNER - Shoes for herself, or her children?
Mrs. PAINE - For herself, flat s. But when he gave that to her I am not certain. I do know that we definitely planned to go out on Friday afternoon, the 22d of November, to buy those shoes. We did not go.
Mr. JENNER - That is you girls planned to do that?
Mrs. PAINE - She and I did; yes.
There were what 3 maybe 4 shoes shops in easy walking distance of the TT? They didn't go. Maybe Ruth thought it redundant to explain that the reason was the arrival of the police -and Rose quoted her as saying she was expecting them.
Which means she had known for a while that they would not be going shoe shopping.
Looks to me like Lee was supposed to meet them in Oak Cliff after work and when he was let out early, he still went and took in the movies while waiting for them at the agreed after work time. Two movies would take him to around that time.
So you dispute the testimony of McWatters, Bledsoe, AND Whaley?
All the arrows aren't going to point in the same wrong direction. All the arrows point to Oswald.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 111:29:08 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,950 |
