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

On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 5:35:03 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote:
> On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 7:27:20 AM UTC-4, donald willis wrote: 
> > On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 2:25:03 PM UTC-7, John Corbett wrote: 
> > > On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 9:07:49 AM UTC-4, donald willis wrote: 
> > > > On Saturday, March 27, 2021 at 1:0    CUT    es as to 
> > > make her account of the event almost worthless. 
> > True, but she seemed genuinely torn between two different versions of 
> > events.
> Which is why it makes no sense to pay any attention to what she said.
> > Jeanette Davis on the 
> > > other hand, older and obviously much more level headed, was very 
> > > consistent in her description of the event, both in her original affidavit 
> > > and WC testimony. 
> > Except that in her affidavit, she said the shell was found in her front 
> > yard; in her testimony, she said side yard.
> Her affidavit said no such thing.

"Then the police arrived.  I showed one of them where I saw this man emptying his gun and we found a shell."  

Such thing.

 She didn't say where the shell was 
> found. She said she saw Oswald cutting across her front lawn emptying his 
> gun. He dumped the shells as he was going around the corner of the house

After he went around the corner.  No shells found at the "corner of the 
house". ,

> passing from the front yard to the side yard. For you to try to find 
> significance in such minutia shows how desperate you are to make your case 
> with no real evidence to support it.

Unless you get the "minutia" correct you can't really say anything!

> > She described hearing a shot, going to the front door, 
> > > hearing Markham scream to call that police and seeing Oswald cutting 
> > > across the corner of their yard on his way to Patton, emptying the shells 
> > > as he did. There is nothing ambiguous about her testimony. Yet you want to 
> > > latch on to the testimony of a ditzy young girl and present that as 
> > > evidence of a cover up. No wonder you can't get the right answer. 
> > > > Virginia Davis 
> > > > > was 16 years old and a bit of a ditz. She went back and forth as to 
> > > > > whether they called the police before or after going to the front door. It 
> > > > > would make no sense that they would have called the police before going to 
> > > > > the front door because they would have had no reason to. 
> > > > If the Davises heard Markham screaming "Call the police!"--after the two 
> > > > heard shots--it would make sense that they'd call the police before 
> > > > venturing out into a shooting scene. 
> > > Now you are just making up hypotheticals. Neither one of them described 
> > > that as the way it happened. Both said they went to the door and then 
> > > heard Markham scream call the police. 
> > Yes, but you know that Virginia occasionally had another version of when 
> > they saw the suspect:
> Back to the ditz. If she keeps changing her story as to the sequence of 
> events, why would you put any stock in anything she said?
> > 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) 
> > 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. 
> > > > The called the 
> > > > > police because Markham told them the cop had been shot and they saw 
> > > > > Oswald crossing their yard while emptying the shells from his gun. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is why Hank told you to follow the consistencies 
> > > > Okay, pal. Follow this one: Four or five witnesses (out of six) said 
> > > > that the Dealey shooter shot from a wide-open window. Climb aboard the 
> > > > Consistency Express. Oh, you can't? 
> > > > 
> > > "Wide open" is a very imprecise description. The witnesses were very 
> > > consistent in saying the shooter was on the 6th floor. No ambiguity there. 
> > Nor in their "wide open", parse it as you will. So much for 
> > "consistency", eh? 
> >
> They were very consistent in placing the shooter on the 6th floor which is 
> what matters. It doesn't really matter how wide open the window was.

Unless you're looking for the truth.

 The 
> physical evidence was all found on the 6th floor. 

Shells are very transportable.

None was found on the 
> fifth floor.

Not after Fritz got done there!

 Three TSBD employees said they were occupying the windows on 
> the fifth floor and we have photographs showing two of them right below 
> the sniper's nest. Of course you are willing to dismiss all of that 
> because of the very non-specific description of what they meant by "wide 
> open".

No.  The Dillard wide angle photo was obviously re-done.

dcw