+- Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com)
+-- Forum: Main JFK Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-Main-JFK-Forums)
+--- Forum: JFK Conspiracy Main Forum (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-JFK-Conspiracy-Main-Forum)
+--- Thread: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #11 Refuted. (/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-11-Refuted)
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #11 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 10-29-2016
(11) Howard Brennan saw Lee Harvey Oswald fire the third shot that killed the President.
This is an outright lie on Bugliosi's part. Bugliosi knows quite well that Howard Brennen refused to identify Oswald, and indeed, described an assassin that CANNOT match Oswald.
It's true that months later, Brennan claimed that he really HAD identified Oswald, but was afraid for his family that other conspirators would harm them if he identified Oswald - but this really makes no sense... because Brennan made the effort to come forward. He also described the assassin wearing light colored clothing - Oswald, of course, wore dark clothing.
It's more reasonable to accept that Brennan was pressured in the intervening months to identify Oswald.
And Warren Commission Believers would have you accept that Brennan could accurately identify a face, yet completely miss the COLOR of the clothing.
Once again, we have the presumption of guilt over-riding the actual facts.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #11 Refuted. - Patrick C - 10-30-2016
(10-29-2016, 05:11 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: (11) Howard Brennan saw Lee Harvey Oswald fire the third shot that killed the President.
This is an outright lie on Bugliosi's part. Bugliosi knows quite well that Howard Brennen refused to identify Oswald, and indeed, described an assassin that CANNOT match Oswald.
It's true that months later, Brennan claimed that he really HAD identified Oswald, but was afraid for his family that other conspirators would harm them if he identified Oswald - but this really makes no sense... because Brennan made the effort to come forward. He also described the assassin wearing light colored clothing - Oswald, of course, wore dark clothing.
It's more reasonable to accept that Brennan was pressured in the intervening months to identify Oswald.
And Warren Commission Believers would have you accept that Brennan could accurately identify a face, yet completely miss the COLOR of the clothing.
Once again, we have the presumption of guilt over-riding the actual facts.
I always felt Brennan saw Oswald's white T shirt and remembered that.
I would not apply too much everyday logic to Brennan's mind set on Nov 22nd 1963. He knew he was the only man in the world who had seen the assassin fire....he would be scared out of his wits literally.
He did get the ID about right though...young white male, slim bulid, about 5ft 10 ish....
I do not think you could make out a face clearly at that height from the street - you could get some things right, but I dont think you could make a 100% positive ID.
All Bugliosi is doing is saying that given Oswald was the assassin, Brennan saw him fire....and I for one believe he did see Oswald fire.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #11 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 10-30-2016
(10-30-2016, 06:01 PM)Patrick C Wrote:(10-29-2016, 05:11 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: (11) Howard Brennan saw Lee Harvey Oswald fire the third shot that killed the President.
This is an outright lie on Bugliosi's part. Bugliosi knows quite well that Howard Brennen refused to identify Oswald, and indeed, described an assassin that CANNOT match Oswald.
It's true that months later, Brennan claimed that he really HAD identified Oswald, but was afraid for his family that other conspirators would harm them if he identified Oswald - but this really makes no sense... because Brennan made the effort to come forward. He also described the assassin wearing light colored clothing - Oswald, of course, wore dark clothing.
It's more reasonable to accept that Brennan was pressured in the intervening months to identify Oswald.
And Warren Commission Believers would have you accept that Brennan could accurately identify a face, yet completely miss the COLOR of the clothing.
Once again, we have the presumption of guilt over-riding the actual facts.
I always felt Brennan saw Oswald's white T shirt and remembered that.
Of course you 'felt' that... a believer has to twist the evidence to fit their preconceived ideas... you forgot to mention that Oswald must have changed his pants as well...
Of course, even the time needed to put on a shirt, AND BUTTON IT UP - would have made the Warren Commission's case untenable.
(10-30-2016, 06:01 PM)Patrick C Wrote: I would not apply too much everyday logic to Brennan's mind set on Nov 22nd 1963. He knew he was the only man in the world who had seen the assassin fire....he would be scared out of his wits literally.
So he immediately searched out and found policemen in order to describe what he saw...
Yep... perfect logic for a believer...
(10-30-2016, 06:01 PM)Patrick C Wrote: He did get the ID about right though...young white male, slim bulid, about 5ft 10 ish....
I do not think you could make out a face clearly at that height from the street - you could get some things right, but I dont think you could make a 100% positive ID.
Of course you don't believe so... despite the fact that witnesses thought that they could.
(10-30-2016, 06:01 PM)Patrick C Wrote: All Bugliosi is doing is saying that given Oswald was the assassin, Brennan saw him fire....and I for one believe he did see Oswald fire.
Yep... PRESUMING what you need to prove, then using those PRESUMPTIONS as "evidence" to make the case. I'm glad you agree.
Knowing that you just HATE the earliest statements & evidence in this case, it's no wonder that you prefer contradicted statements made months or years later...