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

On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 7:30:35 PM UTC-4, donald willis wrote:
> On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 4:27:06 AM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote: 
> > On Sunday, March 21, 2021 at 4:04:26 PM UTC-4, donald willis wrote: 
> > > On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 12:07:19 PM UTC-7, Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon) wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, March 18, 2021 at 9:00:28 PM UTC-4, donald w CUT nce of
> > > > shells at the scene of the shooting (an automatic ejects the shells, a 
> > > > revolver does not). 
> > > Lovely. I'm assuming that your referring to Myers' book. If so, note 
> > > that Hill also says there that he took part in picking up the shells. 
> > > That's more than "presence". 
> > Not referring to that at all. Saw a program sometime in the past where 
> > Hill said this on camera. I don't recall the program
> When was it filmed?
> , but I recall his 
> > statement (not word-for-word, of course). It was what I always suspected. 
> > Maybe sometime in the past in this forum I posted the exact quote and the 
> > TV program (when I was posting as Joe Zircon), but I cannot swear to it. 
> > 
> > If he handled the shells, so what?
> Then, as Myers suggests, he must have seen "auto" on them. And "38". 
> That's what.
> > > > 
> > > > You cannot name or produce Summers supposed witness. 
> > > > 
> > > Supposed? Summers was a doofus who couldn't relay a few simple words? 
> > > Interesting assumption on your part. 
> > Straw man. People misunderstand each other other on occasion. You have one 
> > hearsay account of a supposed unnamed witness who said something, versus 
> > numerous other signed documents by known witnesses that say something 
> > contrary to that.
> Evidence by democracy.
> > 
> > You resolve that discrepancy in favor of the hearsay account of the 
> > unknown witness. I don't. I would LOVE to hear why you resolve it the way 
> > you do, but I doubt you have a good reason. Walk me through your logic 
> > here.
> No "resolve". Summers simply reported what he'd been told, whether it was 
> an error or not.
> > > > You have two hearsay accounts, one of which is explainable in simple terms 
> > > > as a misinterpretation of the evidence. 
> > > Even Myers couldn't quite explain the "38"--unless Hill read it on the 
> > > shells. Remember, the transmission was "auto 38".... Not so simple, Hank. 
> > What's stamped on the actual shells in evidence, Don?
> What do I think of the "actual shells in evidence", Hank? I've told you 
> and John and Bud many times. 

  The evidence isn`t Tinkerbell, it doesn`t disappear if you stop 
believing in it.

> dcw