Bill Brown

(1) Do you agree with Myers' 2020 argument for the Patton Street address for Mrs. Holan on Nov 22, 1963, as convincing to you? Yes. My opinion is that it is an established fact that Holan lived on Patton. (2) Do you agree that that Patton Street address's front window of the living room had a wide-angle almost "perfect" view overlooking most if not all of that block of Patton Street and looked over across the street into part of the alley? Yes, I personally haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise. (3) Do you agree with Myers' reasons argued in his 2020 analysis for concluding Mrs. Holan was home on Nov 22, 1963? Did Myers conclude that? Are you sure? (4) Do you think Mrs. Holan upon hearing shots in her home, would run to her front window to look? Would run to the front window? I can't agree with that since it seems to be a statement as fact. She was roughly a half block away and around the corner. I will agree that it is very possible that she would go to the window. It is also possible that she would not go to the window. (5) Do you think Mrs. Holan saw any of the things Brownlow told that she saw, from her front window on Patton? It's possible that she looked out her window and saw Oswald fleeing down Patton. It is not possible that she looked out her window and saw Tippit's body lying in the street (she had no line of sight from her window to the patrol car). This claim by Brownlow (who mistakenly believed she lived on Tenth) blows his story out of the water. Holan, living on Patton, could have never seen such a thing and therefore it is likely that she never said such a thing to Brownlow. I have doubts that Brownlow ever talked to her at all and if he did, probably didn't get anything significant from her (same as his "interview" with Callaway). (6) Do you think Professor Pulte was lying when he attested that Mrs. Holan had spoken to Brownlow and him, and that she had claimed to them that she was a witness of certain things Nov 22, 1963? I think Brownlow was lying and I think Pulte went along with it. Like I said, they may have indeed talked to Holan, but she certainly did not tell them that she saw Tippit's body lying in the street. (7) Do you think it is conceivable that Brownlow could garble something a witness told him, in retelling, if that witness spoke to Brownlow? I think it is possible that anyone could garble anything that anyone told them. You didn't address my point that Brownlow said Holan told him that she went to her window and saw Tippit's body lying in the street. Or, are you really going to tell me that this is something that Brownlow innocently "garbled"?

Everything one needs to know about the Brownlow/Holan claim can be read right here... http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2020/11/doris-e-holan-and-tippit-murder.html

Greg Doudna said: "I have said from the beginning that she was living on the Patton address on the day of the assassination" ""No, she could not have seen Tippit's patrol car, Tippit's body, etc. from her Patton Street front window." Mike Brownlow said (relaying what he claims Doris Holan told him): ""So, she ran from the back to the living room and threw the curtain back and looked out the window and she could see this officer – Dallas police officer laying in the street; saw his squad car." Greg, there's more, but this should be enough to get you to just stop it already.

"No, she could not have seen Tippit's patrol car, Tippit's body, etc. from her Patton Street front window." The problem for you is that Brownlow said this... "So, she ran from the back to the living room and threw the curtain back and looked out the window and she could see this officer – Dallas police officer laying in the street; saw his squad car." Face it, Greg. When Brownlow told his lie, he fully believed that Holan lived on Tenth Street across the street from the shooting scene. If Holan lived on Patton, as you have agreed she did, then she could not have seen the patrol car and/or the body, as Brownlow claimed she told him she saw. You really should give up on this entire Holan/Brownlow thing.

So we have the switching of "driveway" to "alley" and the switching of "police" to "county sheriff".

Thanks for answering. Yes, I have read every post of yours which I have replied to. I'm just clarifying a couple things. Do you believe that Holan, from her apartment on Patton, could see Tippit's stopped patrol car? Does Holan have a line of sight from her apartment window to Tippit's patrol car?

You missed my point. The "source" from Dale Myers said that the officer having the tryst with a married women who was living on Tenth Street was Dallas Police. In an attempt to tie in Courson as being suspicious, YOU are switching it to County Sheriff.

A lot of errors and mistakes in this "article", not to mention the act of stealing graphics and images from others without credit given. For example, Jack Myers uses a graphic from Dale Myers without ever giving Dale Myers credit or asking Dale for permission. Now, Dale will survive; he will not lose any sleep. But, Jack is wrong to do so, nevertheless. In the article, Jack Myers states that Jack Tatum said the killer came within ten to fifteen feet of him AFTER shooting Tippit. Jack Myers uses this in an attempt to discredit Tatum, saying that "a quick check of the murder scene and known escape path of the gunman shows clearly that the gunman never came closer than 100 feet to Jack Tatum.". Jack Myers is saying that the killer did not come close enough to Tatum for Tatum to notice they way the killer's "mouth curled up". Jack Myers' mistake is that when Tatum says he was "within ten to fifteen feet" of the killer, Tatum is referring to the moment he (Tatum) drove past the stopped patrol car at the time Tippit and his killer were having their brief conversation. This is when Tatum noticed the way the killer's "mouth curled up"; not as Tatum saw the killer running from the scene moments later after the shooting. This is J.D. Tippit 101.

@Greg Doudna Quick question, just for verification... Where do you believe Doris Holan was living on the afternoon of 11/22/63?

@Greg Doudna The patrol car supposedly at the scene was Dallas Police, not Dallas County Sheriff (I've told you this before). Courson was NOT Dallas Police. The "source" who relayed the story to Myers (of the officer having a tryst with a married woman living on Tenth Street) said it was a Dallas police officer; nothing about it being a Sherriff's deputy. There is a difference. Not to mention... your theory requires the member of law enforcement who was having an affair with a married woman living on Tenth Street to actually pay her a visit while driving a police car. Come on, man.

Completely unrelated to my point that Norman heard the action of the bolt AFTER hearing the third shot.

Before he was ever shot in the head, Warren Reynolds told the FBI that he was of the opinion that the man he saw was Lee Oswald.

About a year and a half ago, I visited the Napoleon branch library with Steve Roe and Fred Litwin. The librarian on duty asked the purpose of our visit (since we looked out of place). I began to explain to her why we were there and it turns out that she was fully aware of the visits to that particular library branch by Lee Oswald during the summer of '63. Interesting side note: The librarian was Russian. Now cue the Gil Jesus conspiracy angle....

"He altered his personal history in key ways I assume out of embarrassment over the rap sheet." Really? How about this... He altered his personal history in key ways in order to place himself in Daeley Plaza that day. In his little project "Shattered Friday" (in the early 2000's, if I recall correctly), Brownlow told Ernest Brandt, on video, that he was eight years old at the time of the assassination. Then at some point years later, he spots the photo of the black youth in Dealey Plaza and, knowing the youth appears older than 8 years old (Brownlow's true age), he inserts himself into the photo and begins claiming he was there that day as a 13 year old. Why is this so difficult to understand?

Harold Norman heard: Boom. Click click. Boom. Click click. Boom. Click click.

If you wanna believe something even though the claim came years later, then go ahead. There is zero evidence that Cherami said any of this nonsense; only claims by Fruge and/or Weiss years later. Garrison even sent a team of investigators to the state hospital and couldn't find any employees there who could confirm such a story.

Look Greg. This is real simple. To me, Brownlow has zero credibility. Multiple lies. Proven lies. No thanks. You can hang on his every word if you like. Up to you.

Yes. Once I pointed out to Brownlow that Bowers has all ten fingers present when he appeared in the film Rush To Judgement, Brownlow's response immediately was "Well, he must have had them sewn back on". Also, you said "finger" above. Brownlow said it was three fingers.

"OK on the story of Bowers being kidnapped was wrong. He surely did not claim Bowers himself told him that, so where did he get that? Maybe some hearsay he picked up from somewhere, who knows. If Brownlow believed it was true then its not lying, its wrong but its not lying. Lying isn't simply being wrong, there must be wilfulness, knowing what is said is not true, wilfully saying what is untrue." Did you miss the part where I told you that Brownlow, after it was pointed out to him that Bowers indeed has all fingers accounted for in the Rush To Judgement film, still decided to tell the same story about a year later? He most likely never did stop telling that story despite being made aware that Bowers still had all ten fingers a couple years after the supposed (yeah right) kidnapping incident.

We don't even know that Rose Cherami really said such a thing. The story only comes out from Fruge and Weiss AFTER Cherami had passed away years later.

@Greg Doudna In one video, Brownlow says he was in the 7th grade at the time of the assassination. This would coincide with being 13 years old. In another video, Brownlow says he was an 8 year old kid at the time of the assassination. This would not be the age of a 7th grade kid. Not to mention the obvious lies, like his telling of the story (to any unsuspecting person walking around the grounds of Dealey Plaza) of how Lee Bowers was kidnapped a month or so after the assassination, threatened, had three fingers cut off and then dumped from a car into an alley. He told me this story personally. I then pointed out to him that Bowers, in the Rush To Judgement film made almost three years later, is sitting at the table with Mark Lane. When asked to replicate the spacing of the three shots he heard, Bowers knocks three times on the table top with one hand (all fingers present) while having his other hand resting atop the table (also all fingers present). What did Brownlow do? He said that Bowers must have had the finger sewn back on. I was then in Dealey Plaza about a year later with some friends and I told them to "Watch this" as i called Brownlow over. I asked him to tell them the story of Lee Bowers. Brownlow was all to eager to tell them the same B.S. about how Bowers had the three fingers cut off by conspirators trying to intimidate him into keeping silent. The guy is a L-I-A-R and if you can't accept that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

I'm simply saying that you were wrong when you implied that the Warren Commission was misleading you when you posted CD-630 (with the Holan text placed over one of the houses on Tenth). The Warren Commission did not include that text in the document. That text was added later by some Kook. Do you really not understand where you were wrong?

Brownlow is a proven L-I-A-R and anyone relying on anything he says is playing the fool.

I'm perfectly aware of all that. The Commission document does NOT include the text noting the Holan house. That was added later by the clueless. Point being, you're flat out wrong to imply that the Warren Commission itself ever stated that Holan lived in that house. I'm growing tired of correcting your elementary-level errors and having to explain to you, each time more than once, how you're wrong because you can't accept it the first time. This is just like the time you kept insisting you knew the exact location of Hardy's Shoes and I had to tell you about four times that you were wrong before you finally agreed. It's okay to be ill-informed. But to antagonize while ill-informed is foolish.

"The purported shortcut across the front yard of the Davis residence and exit through the shrubbery is not a foregone conclusion. Many saw the killer proceed to the corner of Patton & 10th, turn left at this corner, and leave the area via the alley." Nonsense. No one saw the killer leave the area via the alley.