Re: Was. W.W. Scoggins the only witness at 10th and Patton who actually

On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 9:44:00 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 7:42:51 PM UTC-8, John Corbett wrote: 
> > On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 4:20:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 6:57:20 AM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > > > On Friday, February 26, 2021 at 8:29:27 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > On Wednesday, February 24, 2021 at 10:43:50 AM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > > > > > On Wednesday, February 24, 2021 at 5:54:13 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Monday, February 15, 2021 at 6:23:12 PM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Monday, February 15, 2021 at 6:14:00 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Friday, February 12, 2021 at 5:15:09 AM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Friday, February 12, 2021 at 12:14:19 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, February 11, 2021 at 6:17:13 PM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, February 11, 2021 at 6:56:07 AM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 11: CUT g before I had paid too 
> > > > > > > > > > much attention to him, and pointing at him, and he was, what I thought, 
> > > > > > > > > > was emptying the gun. 
> > > > > > > > > > Mr. BALL. He had a gun in his hand? 
> > > > > > > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. 
> > > > > > > > > > Mr. BALL. And he was emptying it? 
> > > > > > > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. It was open and he had his hands cocked like he was emptying it. 
> > > > > > > > > > ... 
> > > > > > > > > > Mr. DULLES. Did you know at the time he was emptying his gun? 
> > > > > > > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. That is what I presumed because he had it open and was shaking 
> > > > > > > > > > it. 
> > > > > > > > > > == UNQUOTE == 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > So Barbara also saw the man emptying the gun, she just didn't see him 
> > > > > > > > > > discard a shell. 
> > > > > > > > > However, she says (in her affidavit) that she & "the police" found a shell 
> > > > > > > > > "where I saw this man emptying his gun"*. That they found a shell in the 
> > > > > > > > > front yard. But in her testimony, she changes that to, she found a shell 
> > > > > > > > > in the side yard on Patton (as you quote her, below): 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > *affidavit: "When the police arrived Ishowed [sic] one of them where I 
> > > > > > > > > saw this man emptying his gun and we found a shell." 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Sorry, I don't see the problem. Who besides the killer would be emptying a 
> > > > > > > > gun? 
> > > > > > > The problem is that she is here saying that they found a shell "where I 
> > > > > > > saw this man emptying his gun". 
> > > > > > Hilarious. Do you even listen to yourself? If I asked a five-year old 
> > > > > > where they put something, and it was where they said it was, should I 
> > > > > > accused them of lying? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That's your argument here. 
> > > > You ignored this entirely. 
> > > > > > > If so, she would have been able to lead 
> > > > > > > the cops directly to it, and it would have been found well before Sgt 
> > > > > > > Hill's 1:40 transmission re "auto" shells. 
> > > > > > "would have been able to" vs "did". Look up the difference and report back 
> > > > > > to us. 
> > > > > > > That's why they had Ms Davis 
> > > > > > > change her story for her testimony, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Not established. Your entire premise is begged, based on accusing Barbara 
> > > > > > Davis of lying, which is premised on her saying the shell was found where 
> > > > > > she saw the man emptying his gun. 
> > > > > I'm accusing her of changing her story. As you note, she said, in her 
> > > > > affidavit, "the shell was found where she saw the man emptying his gun", 
> > > > > on the front lawn. In her later testimony, she said it was found on the 
> > > > > side yard, on Patton. 
> > > > No, you're not simply accusing her of changing her story. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > You're claiming there's a massive cover-up / conspiracy to frame Oswald: 
> > > > "That's why *THEY* [emphasis added] had Ms Davis change her story for her 
> > > > testimony," And so it's not as simple as accusing her of changing her 
> > > > story. There is a whole other story imbedded in your claim. Who is "they" 
> > > > and what evidence do you have of that? You have none. And so we come to 
> > > > you constantly imbedding your premise into your arguments, begging the 
> > > > question, because you have no evidence of this cover-up / conspiracy you 
> > > > suggest, just so changes of testimony that you figure must lead somewhere, 
> > > > whether they be nothing more than either a clarification / forgetfulness 
> > > > on the part of the witness or a misunderstanding of the evidence on your 
> > > > part. 
> > > > > > > so that the shell could be said to 
> > > > > > > have been found outside her range of vision, and it could not have been 
> > > > > > > said to have been covered by the transmission. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > What? The man was seen emptying his *revolver*. Numerous witnesses said 
> > > > > > that. 
> > > > > The key word is "found". In their testimony, both Davises now said that 
> > > > > they only SAW the man emptying his gun into his HAND. They now (in their 
> > > > > testimony) say they did NOT see the suspect dropping the shell in the 
> > > > > grass. 
> > > > Virginia Davis did NOT say she saw the suspect dropping the shell on the 
> > > > ground in her affidavit either: 
> > > Nor did she say there that she saw him emptying the gun into his *hand*. 
> > > The hand business turned up only later in their statements & testimony. 
> > Why do you think that is the least bit important? What difference does it 
> > make whether he dumped the shells on the ground or into his hand? 
> 
> The Davis's "advisors" thought it was pretty important. They had them add 
> the business re not dropping the shells in the front yard to later reports 
> & testimony. And I've detailed the importance of this elsewhere. 
> 
> 
> The fact 
> > is he emptied the spent shells so he could reload with live rounds. 
> > > > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/vdavis.htm 
> > > > 
> > > > == QUOTE == 
> > > > ...I saw the boy cutting across our yard and he was unloading his gun. We 
> > > > walked outside and a woman was hollering "he's dead, he's dead, he's 
> > > > shot". This woman told Jeanette to call the Police and she did [sic]. I 
> > > > saw the officer that had been shot lying on Tenth street after Jeanette 
> > > > had called the police. Jeanette found a empty shell [sic] that the man had 
> > > > unloaded and gave it to the police. After the Police had left I found a 
> > > > empty shell [sic] in our yard. This is the same shell I gave to Detective 
> > > > Dhority [sic]. The man that was unloading the gun was the same man I saw 
> > > > tonight as number 2 man in a line up. 
> > > Notice that Virginia talks only of "unloading". And her "unloaded" re 
> > > Barbara Jeanette's shell implies dropping. 
> 
> > Unbelievable the things you think are significant. 
> 
> Unbelievable the things you think AREN"T significant. 
> 

OK, here's your chance to show us how brilliant you are. Explain why the 
manner the gun was unloaded is significant.