Re: Did the Davises see anyone (other than Mrs. Markham)?

On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 6:27:04 PM UTC-4, donald willis wrote:
> On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:16:07 AM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 8:37:30 AM UTC-4, donald willis wrote: 
> > > On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 4:11:26 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote: 
> > > > On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 2:16:09 PM UTC-4, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > > Speaking of the Davises.... A few curiosities: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Barbara D testified that a "man was coming across the yard.... First off 
> > > > > [Mrs. Markham] went to screaming before I had paid too much attention to 
> > > > > him, and pointing at him...." (v3p343) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > While Mrs. M herself testified, "He cut across Patton St. like this. 
> > > > > Toward Jefferson. Then he was still in sight WHEN I BEGAN TO SCREAM AND 
> > > > > HOLLER...." (v3) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > If Mrs. M is correct re the point at which she began to scream, then 
> > > > > Barbara D couldn't have seen the suspect while Mrs M was screaming and he 
> > > > > was still in the front yard. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Another curiosity: Barbara D charts (on CE 534) the path that she says 
> > > > > that the suspect took across the front yard. Note that that path comes 
> > > > > nowhere near the intersection of 10th & Patton. While Mrs. M is famous 
> > > > > for her kitty-korner confrontation with him while he's standing at the 
> > > > > opposite corner of the intersection. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Virginia D., possibly, reconciles Barbara D & Helen M in her own 
> > > > > testimony: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mr. BELIN. Well, let me try and reconstruct your actions then. 
> > > > > You heard the shots? 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
> > > > > Mr. BELIN. You ran to the door? 
> > > > > Mr. BELIN. What did you see when you got to the door? 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Well, we just saw, you know, the police car parked down there 
> > > > > and we wondered what was going on, so we heard Mrs. Markham across the 
> > > > > street calling. 
> > > > > Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Well, she told us to call the police, well, so we went to the 
> > > > > house. 
> > > > > We was already in the house, and we went to the phone and called the 
> > > > > police. (v6p460) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > If we stop right there, Virginia D's testimony makes sense here. She and 
> > > > > Barbara D hear Mrs M telling them to "call the police". And they proceed 
> > > > > to do just that. No mention of Mrs M screaming yet, and no sighting of 
> > > > > the suspect in the yard. She just says to call the police. They do that. 
> > > > > However, Virginia D continues, disastrously: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Well, she told us to call the police, well, so we went to the 
> > > > > house. 
> > > > > We was already in the house, and we went to the phone and called the police. 
> > > > > Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do? 
> > > > > 460 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. Then we went back to the front door. 
> > > > > Mr. BEI.IN. Then what did you do? 
> > > > > Mrs. DAVIS. We saw the boy cutting across the street. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This v e r y s l o w moving suspect is still in sight AFTER the Davises 
> > > > > call the cops!? That's where Virginia D's testimony goes off the rails 
> > > > > here. Up to that point, she seems to reconcile her testimony with Mrs 
> > > > > M's. Then she has the "boy" still in sight and, for some reason, "cutting 
> > > > > across the street". (This is the only time that either Davis says that 
> > > > > they saw the suspect cross a street.) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > But until this incredible coda, Virginia D paints a believable picture of 
> > > > > the shooting scene: The Davises see and hear Mrs M telling them to call 
> > > > > the police, and they do. Mrs M then picks up the story as the suspect is 
> > > > > running up Patton, and THEN she starts screaming. Again, believable: 
> > > > > She doesn't call attention to herself with screaming until he's trotting 
> > > > > off AWAY from her. 
> > > > > 
> > > > Right, Don. Everybody made all this stuff up just to frame poor little Lee 
> > > > Harvey Oswald. The cops. The witnesses. The bus driver. The cab driver. 
> > > > 
> > > > Did you ever consider the possibility that the reason the eyewitness 
> > > > testimony and the physical evidence points to Oswald is because Oswald was 
> > > > the one who killed Tippit? 
> > > They got the right guy for the JFK shooting. Wrong guy for the Tippit 
> > > shooting. 
> > > 
> > > dcw 
> > Don, 
> > 
> > Since you admit they got the right guy for the JFK assassination, perhaps 
> > you can delve into the motivation of everyone to frame Oswald for the 
> > Tippit shooting and let the real cop killer get away? 
> > 
> > Why would they bother? 
> > - As you admit, they got the right guy for the JFK shooting, and framing 
> > him for a separate crime doesn't change the facts involving the 
> > assassination. 
> > 
> > Let's also talk in more detail about why the cops were so keen on framing 
> > Oswald -- and letting the real cop killer get away. Do you have a response 
> > here? I've never seen one. 
> > - Framing Oswald for shooting a cop still leaves Tippit dead. And, if your 
> > charge is true, it leaves the real cop-killer on the street to kill again, 
> > doesn't it? Therefore, why would the police align to frame Oswald? What is 
> > their motivation to do any of this? 
> > 
> > Separate from that, you accuse multiple witnesses of changing their 
> > statements to aid in the frame-up of Oswald. For the most part, these 
> > witnesses are solid American citizens, with no crime record or record of 
> > lying under oath, or even of cheating on a fifth grade test. You've got no 
> > reason to accuse them as you do, other than their statements disagree with 
> > your beliefs, so can you get into their motivation for lying to frame an 
> > innocent man? Is this something you would find easy to do? I wouldn't. Yet 
> > you accuse not just one or two people of changing their statements to 
> > frame Oswald, but many. What is their motivation to do any of this? 
> > 
> > Beyond that, there's also the revolver taken off Oswald in the Texas 
> > Theatre matching the shells in evidence. You argue those were switched 
> > somewhere along the line, but provide no evidence of that. Again, if the 
> > evidence indicated Oswald's weapon wasn't the weapon used to kill Tippit, 
> > what's the reason for the crime lab or the FBI to swap them out and frame 
> > an innocent guy, and let the real killer of Tippit go free? Why would 
> > someone switch them out BEFORE the crime lab or the FBI examined them? 
> > 
> > You make all these accusations, but you don't have a shred of evidence 
> > indicting any of these people for doing anything at all nefarious. You try 
> > to back into these accusations by concentrating on minor discrepancies in 
> > the witness statements -- as if discrepancies in witness statements are 
> > unusual, and meaningful. They aren't. No two witnesses will agree on 
> > everything unless they are in collusion. 
> > 
> > This has been studied extensively and to pretend the witness discrepancies 
> > are meaningful requires willful ignorance and ignoring the science. 
> > 
> > https://nobaproject.com/modules/eyewitness-testimony-and-memory-biases 
> > 
> > Go right ahead with your silly game. It's not convincing. It never will be 
> > to knowledgeable people.
> Oh, and my "silly game" led me to the conclusion that Oswald shot JFK. 
> But if you find that unconvincing.... 
> 

From the fifth floor. That part is very unconvincing.