Which Howard Brennan Does the WC Supporters Believe ?

[Gil Jesus]

40 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

(Is "reddish" versus "brown" really a big deal?)

It is when Brennan never described the color as "reddish" or "brown". He specifically described it as "khaki" ( tan ).

Oswald wasn't wearing khaki colored clothing that day.

 

 

[Guest]

On 2/2/2023 at 5:50 AM, Pat Speer said:

Brennan felt positive the shirt the shooter was wearing was lighter than the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested. The shirt Oswald claimed he'd been wearing at work was lighter than the shirt he was wearing when arrested. Instead of embracing this, and saying "Well, that suggests Oswald's guilt, then, don't it?" all the LNs I know claim Brennan was wrong about the shirt, and that we can dismiss pretty much all his testimony outside that the shooter was Oswald.

Why? Why such sloppy thinking? As a student of religion you can no doubt spot that this has to do with faith. Blind faith. Many if not most LNs are not truly engaged in an exploration of the evidence, and are more concerned with preserving the reputations of the DPD FBI and WC than they are in getting at the truth of the matter. (The inverse is true for most CTs but that's a separate issue.) Here I handed them evidence for Oswald's guilt on a silver platter--and they slapped it away because it would suggest malfeasance by those investigating the case.

It's quite revealing, IMO. 

 

Bye

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Guest]

On 2/2/2023 at 6:14 AM, Gil Jesus said:

It is when Brennan never described the color as "reddish" or "brown". He specifically described it as "khaki" ( tan ).

Oswald wasn't wearing khaki colored clothing that day.

 

 

Bye

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Pat Speer]

11 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

No, but Oswald was surrounded by khaki-colored boxes, including ones right in the window.

Admittedly an unscientific experiment on my part, but do a search on Google Images for "khaki-colored shirt" and you will be astounded at the range of shades, ranging from what I would call "cream" to "dark olive drab."

I am willing to grant misstatements, misperception or even exaggeration by Brennan, although he strikes me as pretty credible. The facts are, (1) within minutes of the assassination, he reported a rifleman in the very place where the shells were found on the very floor where Oswald's rifle was found and employees immediately below experienced shots being fired, and (2) no one, from Vicki Adams to whomever you care to cite, saw an unaccounted-for individual, let alone one in khaki-colored clothing, fleeing the scene.

Add it all together, and to me Brennan is a witness who adds at least something to the equation. Surely not a positive ID of Oswald, but something positive.

Once again, we're not that far apart. Brennan's tardy ID of Oswald is not necessary for one to conclude Oswald killed Kennedy. 

I think you've answered Gil's question in the subject heading. You don't necessarily believe Brennan's ID of Oswald and suspect his ID of a different shirt than the one Oswald was wearing when arrested is correct. 

You have thereby avoided the logical chasm inhabited by all too many--the chasm of assuming Brennan must have been right about seeing Oswald but must have been wrong about the shirt the shooter was wearing, even though he suggested the first was contingent on the second.

Those pesky fibers remain a problem. As I've tried to explain, and as Gil has perfectly explained, Stombaugh said the fibers were clean and neatly placed around the butt plate, which had powder down in the crevice. This precludes the possibility the fibers were snagged before the shooting when Oswald carried the rifle even if he'd wrapped it in a shirt. 

Put yourself in the position of a defense attorney. It's gold. 

[Joe Bauer]

Just to add more eyewitness testimony for comparative perspective:

Arnold Rowland Warren Commission testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - What, if anything, did you observe as to the clothes he was wearing?
Mr. ROWLAND - He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway, and then he had a regular T-shirt, a polo shirt under this, at least this is what it appeared to be. He had on dark slacks or blue jeans, I couldn't tell from that I didn't see but a small portion.
Mr. SPECTER - You say you only saw a small portion of what?
Mr. ROWLAND - Of his pants from his waist down.

Carolyn Walther 12,05,1963 FBI report:

"Shortly after this, a man in the crowd across the street to the west of where she was standing apparently had an epileptic seizure, and an ambulance came by and took the man away. Shortly after the ambulance left, she looked back towards the TSBD Building and saw a man standing on either the fourth or fifth floors, of the window on the south side of the building, which faces toward Elm Street. This man had the window open and was standing up leaning out the window with both his hands extended outside the window ledge. In his hands, this man was holding a rifle with the barrel pointed downward, and the man was looking south on Houston Street. The man was wearing a white shirt and had blond or light brown hair."

 

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Gerry Down]

Who do you think the two men Ruby Henderson saw could be? Her account has always baffled me as the men were too dark skinned to be Oswald but not dark skinned enough to be Bonnie Rae Williams or James Jarman, Harold Norman etc.

Also very difficult to know exactly where she was positioned in the street.

[Gerry Down]

34 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Those pesky fibers remain a problem. As I've tried to explain, and as Gil has perfectly explained, Stombaugh said the fibers were clean and neatly placed around the butt plate, which had powder down in the crevice. This precludes the possibility the fibers were snagged before the shooting when Oswald carried the rifle even if he'd wrapped it in a shirt. 

Put yourself in the position of a defense attorney. It's gold. 

Could the fact the rifle was dusted for prints twice shed light on this issue - once by the DPD and then by the FBI?

[Guest]

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Ron Ege]

1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

Just in case it isn't already linked above, here is Pat's electron-microscope-level analysis of the issue: https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-4b-threads-of-evidence. Put on your reading glasses, make a large bowl of popcorn, and prepare to be overwhelmed.

I did note the two witnesses who said the man was wearing an "open-collared" shirt. When you at the photos of Oswald in his white T-shirt, it is an unusually wide and very prominent V-neck. So the T-shirt is my story, and I'm sticking with it.

I tend to think CTers often work themselves into confusion with the electron-microscope-level approach. Look at a drop of tap water under a microscope and you may never drink water again. This is, of course, what defense attorneys do. That's why I like my matrix of plausibility, even if no one else does - it at least keeps things in the ballpark of reality.

Just common sense: Do we really believe, on the day and weekend of the assassination, garden-variety DPD and FBI clucks were scrambling around with all these nefarious thoughts about how to frame Oswald in their heads? All the discrepancies in regard to Oswald and his clothing strike me as "pretty much what we'd expect."

"No one was ever able to put him (Oswald) in the Texas Schoolbook Depository with a gun in his hand." - Former Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry.

If only there was.

 

[Gil Jesus]

35 minutes ago, Ron Ege said:

"No one was ever able to put him (Oswald) in the Texas Schoolbook Depository with a gun in his hand." - Former Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry.

If only there was.

 

IMO, Brennan never saw Oswald in the window. He saw the man with the rifle, but it wasn't Oswald. He knew that when he viewed the lineup and because he feared that he was the only witness, he knew the real shooter was still at large. So he stopped short of falsely identifying Oswald, saying only that Oswald "most resembled" the man he saw.

Of course, Oswald was in a lineup with three police employees who didn't match his descritpion or the description of the man seen by witnesses.

Once Oswald was dead and he knew he wasn't going to send an innocent man to the chair, Brennan identified Oswald as the man he saw. This closed the book on him and kept him safe from the possibility that the real shooter would come after him.

I find it humorous that cardboard boxes could be mistaken for the shooter's "khaki" clothing. Were they button-down boxes ? What "explanation" will they come up with next ?

Edited February 2, 2023 by Gil Jesus

[David Von Pein]

11 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

He [Stombaugh] said the fibers were folded down neatly into the crevice there. In other words, the fibers didn't get there by the butt plate's rubbing against Oswald.

You're totally misrepresenting what Stombaugh said. He said (my emphasis):

"I found a tiny tuft of fibers which had caught on that jagged edge, and then when the individual who dusted this dusted them, he just folded them down very neatly into the little crevice there, and they stayed."

It's the "jagged edge" that tore the fibers from Oswald's shirt. They were adhering to that "jagged edge" and then when Day came along with his brush, he "folded" them down into the crevice.

That's a very logical conclusion, and it doesn't require any conspiracy or cover-up involving anyone.

And there's no reason at all why a scenario couldn't have occurred which had Lt. Day dusting the crevice area of the rifle FIRST (before he ever touched the fibers), thus filling the crevice with powder, and only THEN he folded the fibers down into that crevice which was now filled with fingerprint powder. You can't possibly prove some scenario like that DIDN'T occur.

 

11 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

He then conjured up a scenario in which this could have happened when Day or whomever was dusting the rifle. In other words, it didn't happen when Oswald or anyone else wiped down the rifle. Why? Because the fibers were neatly folded and powder was down in the crevice. Well, this wouldn't make any sense if the powder was atop the fibers. So that leaves us with the fibers being on top of the powder. 

So, is it possible the powder beneath the fibers somehow slipped past the fibers, and misled Stombaugh? Perhaps but he didn't think so. So this left him with the only "innocent" explanation he could come up with--that the fibers were wrapped around the butt plate edge and down into the crevice when Day or whomever dusted the rifle. That is his testimony.

So...Is this feasible? No, not really. As stated, I've read what amounts to probably a dozen books on evidence collection, with a focus on fingerprint evidence and fiber evidence. And fibers aren't found neatly wrapped around the butt plates of rifles atop fingerprint powder. It doesn't happen that way. If you actually studied the case as opposed to repeating what you want to believe you would know this. 

The weapon is supposed to be inspected for fibers before it is dusted, in part, because the act of dusting a weapon will normally remove the fibers. But not here. Here, we're supposed to believe that the dusting of the rifle somehow folded the fibers into a crevice, and essentially glued the fibers to the rifle, instead of removing them from the rifle. It smells to high heaven.

In my opinion, Pat, the manner in which you have evaluated Paul Stombaugh's testimony and the whole "Fibers On The Rifle" topic is the only thing here that "smells to high heaven".

Plus....

It looks like most CTers here have decided to just take the word of the accused assassin when he claimed that he changed his shirt at his roominghouse on Nov. 22 (from a red one to a brown one)---even though we know from the testimony of at least three witnesses (and there's probably even more) that Oswald WAS wearing a BROWN shirt on 11/22 BEFORE he ever went to his roominghouse that day.

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

You're totally misrepresenting what Stombaugh said. He said (my emphasis):

"I found a tiny tuft of fibers which had caught on that jagged edge, and then when the individual who dusted this dusted them, he just folded them down very neatly into the little crevice there, and they stayed."

It's the "jagged edge" that tore the fibers from Oswald's shirt. They were adhering to that "jagged edge" and then when Day came along with his brush, he "folded" them down into the crevice.

That's a very logical conclusion, and it doesn't require any conspiracy or cover-up involving anyone.

And there's no reason at all why a scenario couldn't have occurred which had Lt. Day dusting the crevice area of the rifle FIRST (before he ever touched the fibers), thus filling the crevice with powder, and only THEN he folded the fibers down into that crevice which was now filled with fingerprint powder. You can't possibly prove some scenario like that DIDN'T occur.

 

In my opinion, Pat, the manner in which you have evaluated Paul Stombaugh's testimony and the whole "Fibers On The Rifle" topic is the only thing here that "smells to high heaven".

Plus....

It looks like most CTers here have decided to just take the word of the accused assassin when he claimed that he changed his shirt at his roominghouse on Nov. 22 (from a red one to a brown one)---even though we know from the testimony of at least three witnesses (and there's probably even more) that Oswald WAS wearing a BROWN shirt on 11/22 BEFORE he ever went to his roominghouse that day.

 

DVP: "And there's no reason at all why a scenario couldn't have occurred which had Lt. Day dusting the crevice area of the rifle FIRST (before he ever touched the fibers), thus filling the crevice with powder, and only THEN he folded the fibers down into that crevice which was now filled with fingerprint powder. You can't possibly prove some scenario like that DIDN'T occur."

PAT's RESPONSE: You really ought to do your homework before you go around spewing such stuff. Do you have any idea how fingerprinting is done? One does not fingerprint a rifle by inserting fingerprint powder into crevices. Your claiming that this may have occurred is jaw-droppingly ridiculous, more than just about anything else you've ever said. Stombaugh's testimony is clear, to those who understand what he's talking about. The fibers were clean and neatly folded and sitting atop fingerprint powder. He needed to explain how this could be without pointing out the obvious--that the fibers could have been planted. So he makes out that the fibers were snagged on the edge of the butt plate, and got folded down into the crevice when Day was brushing, that is, after he applied the powder. This is a ridiculous scenario, but he had to say something. You do understand I hope that FBI examiners testify for the FBI and not themselves, and that Stombaugh could not have implicated the DPD in planting evidence without Hoover's say-so--which is to say without Johnson's say-so. and that was never gonna happen. So he floated his theory, and no one seemed to notice how silly it was...for decades...

As far as the shirt, I read every FBI and WC document regarding the shirts, and wrote what amounts to a book on it, and it's absolutely clear from looking at all the statements that Oswald absolutely positively was not wearing the dark brown shirt prior to going to his rooming house. It's just a fact. Among the commission's star witnesses was Mary Bledsoe--who described the shirt Oswald was wearing as both lighter than the dark brown shirt, and filthy. 

Here is the shirt Oswald said he was wearing. No color photos of this shirt were available until I paid for them to be taken and published them on my website. It is quite obviously the shirt described by Bledsoe. 

 

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by Pat Speer

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

One does not fingerprint a rifle by inserting fingerprint powder into crevices. Your claiming that this may have occurred is jaw-droppingly ridiculous,

And your thinking that no powder at all could have gotten into the crevice is mind-bogglingly silly on your part. (After all, those DPD cops were nothing but incompetent boobs most of the time, right?)

Anyway, obviously SOME powder DID seep into the crevice, whether it was intentionally done by Day or not.

 

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Stombaugh's testimony is clear, to those who understand what he's talking about. The fibers were clean and neatly folded and sitting atop fingerprint powder. He needed to explain how this could be without pointing out the obvious--that the fibers could have been planted. So he makes out that the fibers were snagged on the edge of the butt plate, and got folded down into the crevice when Day was brushing, that is, after he applied the powder. This is a ridiculous scenario, but he had to say something. You do understand I hope that FBI examiners testify for the FBI and not themselves, and that Stombaugh could not have implicated the DPD in planting evidence without Hoover's say-so--which is to say without Johnson's say-so. and that was never gonna happen. So he floated his theory, and no one seemed to notice how silly it was...for decades...

Once again, like most CTers in the world, you're putting some kind of conspiratorial/sinister spin on something that doesn't require it at all. You should stop doing that, Pat.

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

20 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

It is quite obviously the shirt described by Bledsoe. 

Does it have a hole in the elbow (as described by Bledsoe)?

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

And your thinking that no powder at all could have gotten into the crevice is mind-bogglingly silly on your part. (After all, those DPD cops were nothing but incompetent boobs most of the time, right?)

Anyway, obviously SOME powder DID seep into the crevice, whether it was intentionally done by Day or not.

 

Once again, you're putting some kind of conspiratorial/sinister spin on something that doesn't require it at all. You should stop doing that, Pat.

 

Stombaugh said the fibers were clean and neatly folded. He was thereby dismissing that the fibers were in the crevice before the rifle was dusted. So that leaves us with the possibility one end of the fibers was just dangling in space...unseen...prior to Day's dusting the butt plate and that he somehow miraculously neatly folded them into the crevice on top of the powder. If you would just read books on evidence collection as opposed to spewing you'd realize how silly this is. 

As far as the shirt Oswald was wearing. It does not have a hole in the elbow...but neither did the dark brown shirt prior to Bledsoe's saying she thought the shirt Oswald was wearing had a hole in the elbow. 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Pat Speer