From: hsienzant@aol.com   
      
   On Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 2:28:14 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:   
   > On Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 11:03:41 AM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant wrote:    
   > > On Tuesday, November 7, 2023 at 1:36:57 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:    
   > > > FBI 62-109090 (courtesy of Mary Ferrell) reports that "Patterson did   
   identify Oswald and also SAW HIM DISCARD HIS ZIPPER JACKET". If true,   
   Patterson did not, for some reason, help police find the jacket, which was not   
   reported discovered until    
   about 10 minutes after the shooting. If he knew where it was, he could have   
   found it in jig time, and at least pointed it out earlier.    
   > > There you go again, parsing a witness’s words beyond reason. Maybe he   
   didn’t think of it right away. Maybe he didn’t think it was that   
   important. Maybe the cops thought catching the killer of Tippit was more   
   important than capturing the killer†  
   ™s jacket.   
   > Patterson's "witnessing", in total (not just seeing the guy doff a jacket),   
   was, like Reynolds', in his testimony, completely negated by the belated   
   re-discovery of the WFAA-TV footage, years after all pertinent FBI statements   
   and WC testimony.    
   Patterson was accompanying Reynolds up the street, and the film footage shows   
   that he, Reynolds, was telling the cops that his suspect had entered an old   
   house, NOT gone into a parking lot, as both witnesses had misleadingly stated   
   in said statements &    
   testimony. Reynolds, Patterson, the Brocks--all hoist by their own petard...   
   > > > Another case of a witness being a little TOO helpful, like Sam Guinyard   
   on Patterson. He testified he saw the suspect knocking out bullets on Patton,   
   but, if so, he didn't help police find them. Instead, they were "found" an   
   hour or two later.    
   > > Sigh…    
   > >    
   > > More parsing beyond reason.   
   > Or is it, on your part, simply ignoring what the witness said? I was just   
   reporting here, not "parsing".    
      
   No, this is parsing: “… Reynolds, Patterson, the Brocks--all hoist by   
   their own petard...…â€�   
      
      
   > Check his testimony. LNs can't can't admit to the most obvious problems with   
   their favorite witnesses. Take off the blinders, Hank!    
      
   You should. Witnesses are not reliable. I don’t have favorite witnesses —   
   I admit the unreliability of all witnesses. Not because they are all lying   
   their asses off to frame Oswald, but because all witnesses are human. Gil   
   above points out some    
   further issues with this witness, which like all witnesses, sometimes don’t   
   remember stuff, so they forget saying it, or they forget to mention it in a   
   follow-up interview, or whatever.   
      
      
   >    
   > dcw   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)