+- 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... #16 Refuted. (/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-16-Refuted)
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #16 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 11-11-2016
(16) After the assassination, only Oswald missed a roll call at the TSBD.
This is an outright lie on Bugliosi's part... and it shouldn't have taken him 20 plus years to correct this.
- Jack Charles Cason - President of School Book Depositary - left the building at 12:10 p.m. and went home. (VOL:22:P 640)
- Gloria Jean Holt - clerk at TSBD - did not return after shooting. (VOL:19:P.526) (VOL:22:P.652)
- Sharon Simmons Nelson, Secretary, (VOL:19:P.256;VOL: 22-P.665) did not return.
- Bonnie Richey, Secretary, (VOL22:P.671) did not return.
- Carolyn Arnold (VOL:22:P.635) did not return.
- Mrs. Donald Baker, Clerk, did not return (VOL:22:P.635)
- Judy Marie Johnson (VOL22:P.256) did not return.
- Mrs. Stella Mae Jacob (VOL:22:P.665) did not return.
- Charles Givens did not come back.
- Virginia H. Burnum - McGraw-Hill employee does not return (VOL:22:P.636)
- Vida Lee Whatley, Clerk, does not return.(VOL:22:P.680)
- Warren Caster (VOL;22:P.641;VOL 26:P.738) eating lunch in Denton.
- Spauldin “Pud” Jones (VOL:22:P.658) eating lunch at Blue Front with Herbert Junker (another McMillan employee) (22:659)
- Mrs. Helen Palmer, clerk, (VOL:22:P.666) not present was at Love Field.
- Franklin Kaiser - was absent from work on 11/22.(VOL:6:P.342), (VOL:23:P.751)
- Vicki Davis, employee, was absent.
- Dottie Lovelady, employee, was absent.
- Mrs. Rudell Parsons, employee, was absent.
- Joe Bergen, Scott Foresman, absent.
- Maury Brown, McGraw-Hill, absent.
- John Langston, absent.
Bugliosi does admit that Charles Givens was absent, but strangely doesn't note that an APB went out to locate Givens. It's long been a factoid for Warren Commission believers that there was a 'roll call,' and that only Oswald was absent from it - but this is simply untrue, and should have been put to rest long ago.
That Bugliosi has to bring forth such obvious factoids to 'prove' Oswald's guilt is just another illustration of how weak his case is.
And the fact that Patrick will absolutely refuse to publicly state that Bugliosi lied here is yet another proof of Patrick's dishonesty... eh Patrick?
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #16 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 11-15-2016
Yep... as predicted, Patrick ABSOLUTELY REFUSED to address this issue.
Predictable...
Patrick is a coward. He simply cannot bring himself to admit that Bugliosi lied.
Or defend such a blatant lie.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #16 Refuted. - Patrick C - 11-16-2016
Bugliosi refers only to 16 warehousemen and not all the employees of the TSBD.
Your list refers to some non warehouse staff and women leaving prossibly 5 males of which Givens is one. That leaves 4 toward the end of the list who could have been warehousemen.
If they were not - Bugliosis is correct. If one or more were, then he is wrong. I do not have the time to check.
Who cares anyway Holmes....Bugliosi makes an OUTSTANDING case for Oswald's guilt. Far better than yours which is a damp squib by comparison.
Quote:16. After the shooting in Dealey Plaza, nearly all of the sixteen warehousemen who worked in the Depository Building returned to the building and were present at a roll call of employees. Only Lee Harvey Oswald and Charles Givens were not present; Givens was located shortly thereafter.49 So only Oswald left the building and was unaccounted for. Dallas Morning News reporter Kent Biffle, who was inside the Depository Building, wrote in his journal that day, “I listened as the building superintendent [Roy Truly] told detectives about Lee Oswald failing to show up at a roll call. My impression is that there was an earlier roll call that had been inconclusive because several employees were missing. This time, however, all were accounted for but Oswald.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #16 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 11-16-2016
(11-16-2016, 01:57 PM)Patrick C Wrote: Bugliosi refers only to 16 warehousemen and not all the employees of the TSBD.
So your assertion is now that only warehousemen could have pulled the trigger???
WHAT COMPLETE AND TOTAL NONSENSE!!!
It frankly amazes me that someone could actually make that assertion... I've never seen any believer try to make that claim before.
The claim that only Oswald was missing from the TSBD has been made many times by believers down through the years... they rarely do now, because too many people have seen the list of people who were missing that day.
(11-16-2016, 01:57 PM)Patrick C Wrote: Your list refers to some non warehouse staff and women leaving prossibly 5 males of which Givens is one. That leaves 4 toward the end of the list who could have been warehousemen.
If they were not - Bugliosis is correct. If one or more were, then he is wrong. I do not have the time to check.
Nope. You're desperately trying to get me to proclaim that only warehousemen were the critical group.
I ABSOLUTELY REFUSE TO DO SO!!! Any honest man will admit that ANYONE AT ALL who was in the TSBD could have pulled the trigger - they did not have to be warehousemen.
I don't need to be bound by ridiculous assertions... and this simply shows that Bugliosi was a bigger liar than I ever gave him credit for - because you're asserting that Bugliosi believed that only warehousemen could have pulled the trigger.
(11-16-2016, 01:57 PM)Patrick C Wrote: Who cares anyway Holmes....Bugliosi makes an OUTSTANDING case for Oswald's guilt. Far better than yours which is a damp squib by comparison.
If he made an "outstanding" case - then why am I dismantling it point by point... and you refuse to respond to many of them, and lie and show cowardice on the rest?
(11-16-2016, 01:57 PM)Patrick C Wrote:Quote:16. After the shooting in Dealey Plaza, nearly all of the sixteen warehousemen who worked in the Depository Building returned to the building and were present at a roll call of employees. Only Lee Harvey Oswald and Charles Givens were not present; Givens was located shortly thereafter. So only Oswald left the building and was unaccounted for. Dallas Morning News reporter Kent Biffle, who was inside the Depository Building, wrote in his journal that day, “I listened as the building superintendent [Roy Truly] told detectives about Lee Oswald failing to show up at a roll call. My impression is that there was an earlier roll call that had been inconclusive because several employees were missing. This time, however, all were accounted for but Oswald.
Now, instead of merely quoting Bugliosi, why can't you actually deal with the facts I've presented?
Why not present evidence that only a warehouseman could have pulled the trigger? Because unless you do - Bugliosi's point has been thoroughly dismantled.