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

On Wednesday, March 10, 2021 at 2:21:28 PM UTC-8, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 10:37:01 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote: 
> > On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 10:52:47 AM UTC-8, John Corbett wrote: 
> > > 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:     CUT
> > 
> > This is borne out by two subsequent FBI reports from information obtained 
> > from the Dallas Police Department. 
> > 
> > "Can Dallas Police Department tell who picked up empty shells and where 
> > they were found with respect to the shooting of Officer Tippit.... 
> > Obtained from captioned file.... 1 [empty hull] found by Barbara Jeanette 
> > Davis... in front yard." (FBI Agent Joseph J. Loeffler, 12/4/63 memo) 
> > 
> > "One of these hulls... was found in the front yard of Barbara Jeanette 
> > Davis... [and] turned over to Captain George M. Doughty of the Dallas 
> > Police Crime Laboratory.... Captain Doughty stated that all hulls were 
> > received in the Police Crime Laboratory on November 22, 1963." (FBI Agent 
> > Vincent E. Drain, 11/28/63 report)
> So to buttress your assumption about where the shell was found, you cite 
> two hearsay reports by FBI agents who weren't at the scene of the crime on 
> 11/22/63, but prepared reports from other sources. Am I understanding 
> your argument correctly?

Well, I'm certainly understanding your desperation.  


> > 
> > The DPD, then, told the FBI that the Barbara Davis hull was found in the 
> > front yard.

> Or the FBI assumed it, just as you assumed it.

One could as easily maintain that YOU'RE the one who's assuming--both what 
Barbara D. meant & that the FBI was wrong.  You're the one going against 
the evidence, in this instance.  You're re-imagining the evidence.

> > 
> > At the hearings, however, Barbara Davis changed her story and testified, 
> > "We found one shell... in the grass beside the house". (v3p345) But 
> > Captain Doughty, who recovered the shell (With Malice, p266), told the FBI 
> > that it was found in the front yard. Shades of the two children in "La 
> > Dolce Vita", who "[go] off in a different direction again... screaming 
> > they can see the Madonna". ("There she is!" /No, "There!" /No, "They're 
> > running the other way....") The two cannot be believed, and neither can 
> > Barbara Davis, who was the source of one story for the FBI and a 
> > contradictory one for the Warren Commission. The man in the middle, 
> > Doughty, was not questioned by the Commission. 
> > 
> > Two sites, no shell, apparently....
> Sorry, this is where you lose me.

You got lost right off the bat, with Barbara D's affidavit.

 How do we go from one shell recovered by 
> Barbara Davis and turned over to the police to no shells recovered by 
> Barbara Davis? 
> 
> You are playing a shell game with the evidence and when we're not looking, 
> you're flicking the pea off the table. Barbara Davis found one shell and 
> turned it over to the police. 
> 
> And Doughty is not the man in the middle. He's the crime lab person who 
> took possession of the shell. He isn't specified in the above as the 
> police officer Barbara Davis gave the shell to.
> > 
> > There you go. She changed her story to make it seem like a shell had been 
> > found AFTER Hill's 1:41 transmission & thus was not an "auto 38".... 
> >
> I don't see a change in her story. I see assumptions by you of what she 
> meant, followed by hearsay from FBI agents who weren't at the site on 
> 11/22/63, with another assumption that this means she changed her story, 
> followed by a huge assumption about what this all means. 
> 
> None of your assumptions above are supported by the evidence. 

No evidence here, in this instance--witness, FBI--is good enough for you.  
(You might be taking your cue from me!)  You do know that you have to 
dismiss the FBI reports, which are actually closer to evidence than is 
your dismissal.

dcw