Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket

[Greg Doudna]

12 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

But... I was asking for a LOGICAL explanation.  Not just ANY explanation.

Care to elaborate on that? What is illogical?

I am aware that a theory can be internally consistent, i.e. logical, and also wrong. A lot of misbegotten conspiracy theories work that way, boiling down to matters of judgment over plausibility of explanations of facts. But you are saying illogical... what do you mean?

I see the argument I have developed on the Tippit case as in the genre of a modern-day Innocence Project case concerning a wrongful conviction. Explain why you are rejecting out-of-hand the argument--including reasonable explanation of the matter you raised-- on grounds that it is illogical.

 

[Tom Gram]

51 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Care to elaborate on that? What is illogical?

I am aware that a theory can be internally consistent, i.e. logical, and also wrong. A lot of misbegotten conspiracy theories work that way, boiling down to matters of judgment over plausibility of explanations of facts. But you are saying illogical... what do you mean?

I see the argument I have developed on the Tippit case as in the genre of a modern-day Innocence Project case concerning a wrongful conviction. Explain why you are rejecting out-of-hand the argument--including reasonable explanation of the matter you raised-- on grounds that it is illogical.

 

I second this motion. Greg really did his homework on the Tippit case, and if you have a problem with his theory, and think it’s “illogical”, you’re going to have to explain why. 

Also Greg, wasn’t Oswald seen changing seats throughout the theater? Do you think he could have taken off the blue jacket in his first seat and maybe that’s why it wasn’t found? 

[Bill Brown]

16 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I second this motion. Greg really did his homework on the Tippit case, and if you have a problem with his theory, and think it’s “illogical”, you’re going to have to explain why. 

Also Greg, wasn’t Oswald seen changing seats throughout the theater? Do you think he could have taken off the blue jacket in his first seat and maybe that’s why it wasn’t found? 

To dismiss the idea that Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket is to ignore the only witness that we have to rely on, the only person that was there.

 

Only one person was present when Oswald walked out the door.  This person says that Oswald was zipping up a jacket as he left.  Therefore, if you dismiss this one person, you're doing so out of convenience because you know what it means if Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket and was seen by Johnny Brewer without a jacket.

 

The only other option (to avoid having to address Oswald's ditching of his jacket between the rooming house and the shoe store) is to make up nonsense about Oswald doubles.  THAT is completely illogical.

 

[Greg Doudna]

42 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

To dismiss the idea that Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket is to ignore the only witness that we have to rely on, the only person that was there.

Only one person was present when Oswald walked out the door.  This person says that Oswald was zipping up a jacket as he left.  Therefore, if you dismiss this one person, you're doing so out of convenience because you know what it means if Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket and was seen by Johnny Brewer without a jacket.

The only other option (to avoid having to address Oswald's ditching of his jacket between the rooming house and the shoe store) is to make up nonsense about Oswald doubles.  THAT is completely illogical.

Bill I must wonder if you read a word I said. I completely agree with housekeeper Earlene's testimony of seeing Oswald leaving zipping up a jacket, and never said otherwise. What does your objection have to do with anything I wrote?

[Bill Brown]

4 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Bill I must wonder if you read a word I said. I completely agree with housekeeper Earlene's testimony of seeing Oswald leaving zipping up a jacket, and never said otherwise. What does your objection have to do with anything I wrote?

I stated:

 

"The only other option (to avoid having to address Oswald's ditching of his jacket between the rooming house and the shoe store) is to make up nonsense about Oswald doubles.  THAT is completely illogical."

[Sean Coleman]

Sorry to repeat myself ….but Bernard Haire reports there was a double rapidly ushered out the back door and whisked off into the ether, seen him interviewed, seems a cool guy 

[Greg Doudna]

11 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

I stated:

 

"The only other option (to avoid having to address Oswald's ditching of his jacket between the rooming house and the shoe store) is to make up nonsense about Oswald doubles.  THAT is completely illogical."

I don't have anything to do with Oswald doubles or impersonations in the Tippit case. If you are unwilling to read, nothing I can do or say.

I do think there are mistaken witness identifications, not the same thing.

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

I second this motion. Greg really did his homework on the Tippit case, and if you have a problem with his theory, and think it’s “illogical”, you’re going to have to explain why. 

Also Greg, wasn’t Oswald seen changing seats throughout the theater? Do you think he could have taken off the blue jacket in his first seat and maybe that’s why it wasn’t found? 

Thanks Tom. Yes, that is what I think on the blue jacket. It was somewhere else in the theatre, not at or near the seat where he was arrested. As you note Oswald moved around to several seats inside the theatre according to witness Jack Davis, patron in the theatre that day. As to how Oswald's blue jacket would get from left behind somewhere in the theatre to over three weeks later reported newly found in the domino room at the TSBD and turned in to the FBI, I discussed that at the end of my jackets piece, https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27754-the-jackets-as-exculpation-of-oswald-as-the-tippit-killer-an-analysis/.

[Bill Brown]

7 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I don't have anything to do with Oswald doubles or impersonations in the Tippit case. If you are unwilling to read, nothing I can do or say.

I do think there are mistaken witness identifications, not the same thing.

But, you said this (below).  Sorry man, NOT logical at all:

 

"Meanwhile, the Tippit killer, who resembled Oswald and was mistaken for Oswald by some witnesses just as numerous witnesses mistakenly identified various persons as Oswald post-assassination, abandoned his light-gray, almost-white, jacket in flight, presumably in order to make identification more difficult in a hot pursuit situation from police. The killer went by Brewer's store, entered the Texas Theatre without purchasing a ticket and went up into the balcony, with intent to kill Oswald next. That intent was thwarted by the timely and rapid arrival of police who saved Oswald's life by arresting him. 

That there were two, not one, persons among the ca. 15 or so patrons inside the theatre that day, who witnesses thought resembled or looked like Oswald--Oswald and someone else--is established from two independent testimonies from inside the theatre..."

 

Edited July 11, 2022 by Bill Brown

[Greg Doudna]

13 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

But, you said this (below).  Sorry man, NOT logical at all:

"Meanwhile, the Tippit killer, who resembled Oswald and was mistaken for Oswald by some witnesses just as numerous witnesses mistakenly identified various persons as Oswald post-assassination, abandoned his light-gray, almost-white, jacket in flight, presumably in order to make identification more difficult in a hot pursuit situation from police. The killer went by Brewer's store, entered the Texas Theatre without purchasing a ticket and went up into the balcony, with intent to kill Oswald next. That intent was thwarted by the timely and rapid arrival of police who saved Oswald's life by arresting him. 

That there were two, not one, persons among the ca. 15 or so patrons inside the theatre that day, who witnesses thought resembled or looked like Oswald--Oswald and someone else--is established from two independent testimonies from inside the theatre..."

Again you're asserting illogic without explaining why any of the above is illogical. For example, your three-dot ellipses at the end leave off that I cited two inside-the-theatre witness testimonies for exactly what you say is "NOT logical at all" (for those two witnesses to have seen what they said they saw). For example, for the life of me I do not understand why you would say it is illogical that a deputy sheriff's claim that he saw a man coming down from the balcony whom he thought was Oswald but who clearly was not, might logically be accounted for by his having seen a man coming down from the balcony who he thought looked like Oswald but clearly was not.

What's illogical about deputy Courson's account on that point? Explain?

"I pulled up and bumped the bicycle rack in front of the theater in front of the theater, left the car and went in and identified myself as an officer to the ticket taker. I didn't know whether she even saw me or not, but I flashed my badge, then walked from there onto the stairs.

"I started up the stairs to the balcony because that is where the call said that he was hiding. I'm reasonably satisfied in my own mind that I met Oswald coming down. I was looking for a man in a white or light colored jacket because at that time I hadn't been told that he had discarded the jacket and that it had been found. So there were two reasons why I didn't stop him. I'm looking for a man in the balcony, not coming down walking casually, and the description didn't fit because he was wearing a kind of plaid or checkered patterned shirt, not the light colored jacket. But I'm reasonably sure that it was Oswald." (Bill Courson, Sheriff's Department, in Sneed, No More Silence [1998], 485).

What's illogical about Courson's story, apart from the mistaken identification of the man he saw as Oswald? Explain?

[Bill Brown]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Again you're asserting illogic without explaining why any of the above is illogical. For example, your three-dot ellipses at the end leave off that I cited two inside-the-theatre witness testimonies for exactly what you say is "NOT logical at all" (for those two witnesses to have seen what they said they saw). For example, for the life of me I do not understand why you would say it is illogical that a deputy sheriff's claim that he saw a man coming down from the balcony whom he thought was Oswald but who clearly was not, might logically be accounted for by his having seen a man coming down from the balcony who he thought looked like Oswald but clearly was not.

What's illogical about deputy Courson's account on that point? Explain?

"I pulled up and bumped the bicycle rack in front of the theater in front of the theater, left the car and went in and identified myself as an officer to the ticket taker. I didn't know whether she even saw me or not, but I flashed my badge, then walked from there onto the stairs.

"I started up the stairs to the balcony because that is where the call said that he was hiding. I'm reasonably satisfied in my own mind that I met Oswald coming down. I was looking for a man in a white or light colored jacket because at that time I hadn't been told that he had discarded the jacket and that it had been found. So there were two reasons why I didn't stop him. I'm looking for a man in the balcony, not coming down walking casually, and the description didn't fit because he was wearing a kind of plaid or checkered patterned shirt, not the light colored jacket. But I'm reasonably sure that it was Oswald." (Bill Courson, Sheriff's Department, in Sneed, No More Silence [1998], 485).

What's illogical about Courson's story, apart from the mistaken identification of the man he saw as Oswald? Explain?

Nothing is illogical about Courson's account (above).  What is illogical is your belief that it somehow means that this is evidence or proof that Oswald was inside the theater as well as the man who resembled Oswald who had just killed a police officer.

 

Oswald first went up to the balcony.  There were teenagers up there and he decided to then go down to the main lobby, where he was later arrested after a scuffle.  So what?

[Bill Brown]

A little over a week and still no logical explanation for why Oswald ditched his jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson (other than to change his appearance since he had just gunned down a police officer).

[Derek Thibeault]

We need a docuseries on the Tippit murder. I mean, if they can have another one on DB Cooper. We need this case to be reviewed by both sides and all aspects gone over. There are times when I say LHO didn't kill him, wasn't there. And other times I believe he did kill him, and it was for a reason not because Tippit was trying to arrest him. And yes I have to read the McBride book, but I need to find it cheaper.

[Charles Blackmon]

17 minutes ago, Derek Thibeault said:

 And yes I have to read the McBride book, but I need to find it cheaper.

I am interested in reading Into the Nightmare as well, but those Amazon prices do give me pause at the moment.

[Bill Brown]

With Malice by Dale Myers is all you need to read.  It tells you everything you need to know.  This is a fact.