Bill Brown

Let me ask you... is it your belief that the man seen by Brewer in front of the shoe store was Larry Crafard?

Cairns certainly did stand in line for 45 minutes (my rough estimate, no exaggeration). I talked to him for a minute or two while he was in this line. I had no problem with Cairns standing in line to meet Ruth until I later learn he ran back home only to post an article bashing her. It's hypocritical, no matter how you slice it. It tells me that he doesn't really believe in the backbone of his Ruth-bashing article. In the article, Cairns implies that Ruth Paine is "delusional" (his word). Once, when a photo of Ruth, Michael and Priscilla Johnson McMillan was up on the screen, Cairns and his cohorts had a good laugh saying the three must have been at a CIA BBQ.

I didn't say anything close to that. Are you just trolling? You must be. I thought you were smarter. My point, which should have been clear to those really interested in understanding, is that I hold James Files in the same low regard which Johnny Cairns apparently holds Ruth Paine. Yet, I did not act like a complete hypocrite and run across the street to talk to Files, much less stand in line for 45 minutes to get his autograph and then run back home to write a shitty article about him.

I believe the man Davis saw was indeed Oswald. However, Davis' description of the scenario doesn't have Oswald in the theater for over 20 minutes. In other words, I believe Davis is describing Oswald, just not as early as he is describing. Hell, his memory was not clear on pretty much everything, quite frankly (and why would it be?). As for the man seen by Brewer, of course any eyewitness can be wrong. Only a fool would say otherwise. But, all we have to go on in this "man in front of the shoe store ducking police cars" scenario are the words and descriptions of Johnny Brewer and he (Brewer) was very adamant that the man he saw ducking into the store front was the same man he saw taken out by police. I guess you actually believe that Brewer saw one man out in front of his store and pointed out a completely different man inside the theater and this man inside the theater just happens to be the same guy seen by multiple eyewitnesses fleeing the Tippit scene and is the same guy who worked inside the Depository building and was no longer there. You do agree, don't you, that Brewer, when he pointed out the guy inside the theater, had no idea that this guy was an employee of the Depository and would later be positively identified by multiple eyewitness as the man fleeing the Tippit scene with a gun in his hand. Right? If so, then it's just pretty damn bad luck for Oswald that Brewer picked him out over other men inside the theater at that moment (though admittedly there weren't many patrons). It seems that you would have us believe that Brewer simply pointed out the man who most resembled the man he saw out in front of his store versus pointing out the man he claims he actually did see. It's only your wishful thinking, in order to get Oswald off the hook for killing a cop. You have no reason whatsoever to believe that the man seen by Brewer out in front of his shoe store was someone other than Oswald.

"Better to stick to being responsive to the substance of what Cairns writes..." By the way, it's coming soon.

This past November 22nd, for the 60th, I was in Dealey Plaza (with Ruth) and I saw James Files across the street (he was standing on the infield between Elm and Main). I didn't make it a point to go talk to him. If the guy is telling the truth, he's a murderer. If he's not telling the truth, then he's simply a liar. Either way, I don't hold him in high regard and had no desire to go meet him. On top of that, there was no line at all; I could have walked right up to him. Johnny Cairns is being hypocritical.

I think it was even a little later than 1:40, but okay. In the interview Jack Davis gave to Gary Mack, what gives you the impression that the scenario where the man tried to sit beside Davis (and eventually sat briefly a couple seats away) took place over 20 minutes before the lights came on?

First, let me ask you a question. What time do you think the house lights came on?

It shows the hypocrisy of Cairns. The fact that he stood in a line for 45 minutes to meet Ruth Paine tells me that he doesn't really believe the nonsense he posts about her in his poor article and that he's simply seeking attention. My opinion. (And I didn't call anyone any name)

"Davis says at 8:00, "he set down by me--close to me", before he got up and moved to sit by someone else." Correct. But, that isn't what you stated a few posts back. You stated that Oswald sat next to Davis. But Davis didn't say that; he says Oswald sat down a couple seats away from him. Just watch the interview, for crying out loud. "The "opening credits" is in either the Marrs or Burroughs interview of Davis. In this Sixth Museum video he says at 7:18 concerning the timing that he thought Oswald had sat near him when the movie was just about to come on: "the movie had already come on--had--just about to come on I think it was..." Again, Davis says nothing AT ALL about Oswald sitting next to him during the film's opening credits. I'm not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat myself for you guys to get it. When trying to determine a timeline for Oswald arriving inside the theater, this stuff matters.

I watched Jack Davis' Oral History interview with Gary Mack for the Sixth Floor Museum long ago. He certainly didn't say that Oswald was sitting next to him during the opening credits. In fact, he never said that Oswald sat next to him at all. He said Oswald started to sit right next to him but then ended up sitting a couple seats away. Also, Davis says nothing about Oswald sitting next to him during the "film's opening credits". I'm not sure where you got that from. As for Crossfire and Jim Marrs (I read the book over 30 years ago), when you consider the Sixth Floor Museum interview with Jack Davis where Davis never says Oswald sat right next to him, it becomes obvious that Marrs is misquoting Davis a bit (or Davis changed his story by the time he sat down with Gary Mack for the Museum interview). The bottom line is, in the interview Davis gives with Gary Mack for the Museum, he does not say that Oswald sat next to him and he certainly doesn't say that Oswald was sitting beside him during the film's opening credits. Maybe YOU should go watch the interview again.

Battery powered wristwatches will consistently run slow when the battery is nearing the end of it's life. Either way, I think it comes down to which you'd choose to rely on... A police radio which tracks time all day long as a course of daily business... versus... Bowley's wristwatch, along with his later recollection.

A wind up watch as opposed to...? I don't think digital watches existed until the early 70's.

First, cite for Davis saying Oswald was ever sitting next to him.

Question: "Did you see the person who fired the weapon?" Jean Hill: "No. I didn't see any person fire the weapon."

Oswald left the rooming house zipping up a jacket as he went out the door. Oswald is seen by Johnny Brewer standing in front of the shoe store on Jefferson with no jacket. Forget for a moment the murder of Tippit. Forget Tenth and Patton. Forget anything found under a car behind the Texaco station. Why did Oswald ditch his jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson?

In the article, Johnny Cairns states: "Mrs. Paine & Mr. Mallon’s narrative is a rehash of the weary, well-worn trope that the Warren Commission clung to in their attempts to explain Oswald's hypothetical motives in the assassination of President Kennedy." I find it comical that I personally saw Cairns stand in a line that was forty-five minutes long to get their autographs. @Johnny Cairns

The McIntyre photo was obviously taken seconds after the assassination. The Hertz clock reads 12:30. When we look at the Dallas Police tapes, we see that the very first call after the 12:30 timestamp call is Chief Curry stating: “Go to the hospital - Parkland Hospital. Have them stand by.” (A clear reference to the assassination) This is an example of "real" time connecting with "police" time, probably within less than one minute. "Real" time (the Hertz clock) says the assassination occurred at 12:30pm. "Police" time (the tapes) says the assassination occurred at 12:30pm. So why is it so difficult to accept that the police tapes are accurate when they show that T.F. Bowley called in the Tippit killing (using Tippit's squad car radio) at 1:17 (versus Bowley's statement that his watch read 1:10 when he arrived)? Bowley's description of his actions upon arriving on the scene tells us he was on the patrol car radio in about one minute. Was the clock in the dispatch room accurate at 12:30 and somehow very inaccurate by 1:17? The whole idea that the police tapes were off by as much as 6 minutes is complete nonsense. Bowley arrives on the scene and walks over to the body and notes that there is nothing he can do for the officer. He then goes to the patrol car, takes the mic from Benavides and reports the shooting to the dispatcher (Murray Jackson). All in all, Bowley is on the radio about 60 to 90 seconds after arriving. Bowley's report to the dispatcher was at 1:17. Therefore, Bowley arrived around 1:15/1:16. His 1960's era windup wristwatch, which he claims read 1:10 when he arrived, was 5 minutes slow.

Isn't anyone bothered by the hypocrisy of Johnny Cairns which I point out above? He's simply an attention-seeker; nothing more.

"Eddy Benavides was shot in the head (he was the lookalike brother to closest Tippit shooting witness Domingo Benavides)" Great. Finally. Please post the photo you have seen of Eddie Benavides. Thanks. 🙄

You're assuming Markham regularly caught the 1:12 bus. She never said anything about catching any bus at 1:12. A bus also stopped at that same bus stop at 1:22.

"Oswald was surrounded by cops. If he had just killed Tippit in a desperate attempt to escape being taken into custody, why wait until the house lights were turned on and McDonald was right on top of him to attempt to pull out his gun?" I believe that Nick McDonald, hoping to avoid an in-theater shootout, wanted to give Oswald a false sense of security, i.e. "Maybe these cops don't know exactly who they're looking for and aren't specifically looking for me. Therefore, I'll wait it out and perhaps walk out of here later." McDonald tells how, as he was making his way up the aisle toward Oswald, he questioned a few others in the theater all while keeping his eye on Oswald.

I'm not sure what you mean by "cover" but I drove Ruth to the event. In the article, Johnny Cairns states: "Mrs. Paine & Mr. Mallon’s narrative is a rehash of the weary, well-worn trope that the Warren Commission clung to in their attempts to explain Oswald's hypothetical motives in the assassination of President Kennedy." I find it comical that I personally saw Cairns stand in a line that was forty-five minutes long to get their autographs.

"Then, again allegedly, Oswald not just kills officer Tippit but does so in an extremely brutal way. 3 body shots topped off with a coup de grace shot in his head? 3 body shots weren't enough? Mafia hit men go that far to send a message of fear to anyone else who may threaten their bosses." No. Consider the idea that there was no "coup de grace" shot to Tippit's head and instead, that Oswald fired that shot from across the hood of the patrol car like the other three bullets which hit Tippit. Other than Jack Tatum, not one witness describes a final shot separated from the original outburst of shots. In fact, Domingo Benavides, the closest to the shooting, specifically stated that after firing the shots from across the hood, the killer backed up onto the sidewalk and took off for the corner.

Greg, I respect your defense of Ruth but don't you do the same thing with Larry Crafard?