+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened (/thread-14350.html)
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 14-12-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:If you're going to posit "two Oswalds" as a reasonable answer to these two different issues, why not just posit three Oswalds? Then you solve the PM mystery, AND explain the 2nd floor/4th floor mystery!
I've never seen evidence for 3 Oswald's Drew. Armstrong's theory suggests two. The incident at the Texas Theater proves two. And Duncan MacRae has proven beyond a doubt, for those with the photo analysis skills to detect it, that Prayer Man is a woman. And I totally agree with Dawn that Prayer Man is a rabbit hole time-waster, caused (in my opinion) mostly by persons hooked on an already-debunked pet theory.
Don't be cute Drew. You are the one who spotted the white sleeve.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 14-12-2015
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:At this point, what does he have to tell him that a crime had actually been committed?
Shots, crowd reaction, and possibly a police radio announcement of shots. The motorcade stopping, and security personnel opening car doors to emerge, and maybe security personnel diving on Johnson to protect him. Baker was a good cop. He didn't need it spelled-out to him.
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:If Baker had followed anything even CLOSE to proper procedure, he would have, instead of racing by himself to the 7th floor (without telling a soul), attempted to enlist the help of officers on the corner of Houston and Elm to seal off the entrances and exits to the TSBD. At the very least, he would have told them what he was doing, and asked them to be alert for anyone leaving the building, and to call for backup to help seal off the exits.
Seriously, was Baker so stupid he didn't think a shooter could escape by the stairs, while he and Truly were riding up on an elevator? This is why the whole "mad dash to the 2nd floor" stinks to high Heaven of being another concoction of the WC.
All the things you list would actually have delayed possibly capturing a shooter or securing a scene with a mad killer.
Bob, I doubt Baker had a computer with him to list out all the things in hindsight that would have made his option of investigating where the shots came from less than perfect.
I think ever since Murphy you have been on an endeavor to construct a Depository scenario that supports his Prayer Man theory. I mean it is OK to do that since at the time Prayer Man was an open possibility and, like any assassination theory, deserved exploration. I don't think people realize that Duncan MacRae has disproven Murphy. This will be confirmed with expert photo analysis of the Darnell frames. Read LeDoux's response to MacRae on the Education Forum. It's absolute made-up garbage that no one else would be allowed to get away with.
You would think that if the Commission was going to fabricate an Oswald encounter it would be closer to the 6th floor? You can't ignore Carolyn Arnold.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Bob Prudhomme - 14-12-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Bob Prudhomme Wrote:At this point, what does he have to tell him that a crime had actually been committed?
Shots, crowd reaction, and possibly a police radio announcement of shots. The motorcade stopping, and security personnel opening car doors to emerge, and maybe security personnel diving on Johnson to protect him. Baker was a good cop. He didn't need it spelled-out to him.
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:If Baker had followed anything even CLOSE to proper procedure, he would have, instead of racing by himself to the 7th floor (without telling a soul), attempted to enlist the help of officers on the corner of Houston and Elm to seal off the entrances and exits to the TSBD. At the very least, he would have told them what he was doing, and asked them to be alert for anyone leaving the building, and to call for backup to help seal off the exits.
Seriously, was Baker so stupid he didn't think a shooter could escape by the stairs, while he and Truly were riding up on an elevator? This is why the whole "mad dash to the 2nd floor" stinks to high Heaven of being another concoction of the WC.
All the things you list would actually have delayed possibly capturing a shooter or securing a scene with a mad killer.
Bob, I doubt Baker had a computer with him to list out all the things in hindsight that would have made his option of investigating where the shots came from less than perfect.
I think ever since Murphy you have been on an endeavor to construct a Depository scenario that supports his Prayer Man theory. I mean it is OK to do that since at the time Prayer Man was an open possibility and, like any assassination theory, deserved exploration. I don't think people realize that Duncan MacRae has disproven Murphy. This will be confirmed with expert photo analysis of the Darnell frames. Read LeDoux's response to MacRae on the Education Forum. It's absolute made-up garbage that no one else would be allowed to get away with.
You would think that if the Commission was going to fabricate an Oswald encounter it would be closer to the 6th floor? You can't ignore Carolyn Arnold.
No, the things I list would have prevented a killer from escaping, via the stairs, while Truly and Baker rode the elevator up that they tried to summon.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 14-12-2015
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:No, the things I list would have prevented a killer from escaping, via the stairs, while Truly and Baker rode the elevator up that they tried to summon.
So you're saying Baker would have let a potential cornered shooter upstairs go uncontrolled and possibly take hostages, or kill employees?
Bob if Baker takes the stairs then he lets the shooter escape via the elevator. If he takes the elevator then he lets the shooter escape via the stairs. I don't think it is reasonable, when Baker was running to confront a shooter, that you insert this planned rationality into Baker's mind as if he was a robo-cop with a computer graphic of the whole situation and all the plays from years of analysis present in consciousness. Your argument makes sense in a sophist analysis of the scenario but it isn't really realistic in real time. I think you are trying to force Murphy over the real events.
Your argument is basically because my years-long analysis of Baker conforms to the best police practices that therefore Baker would and should have practiced them. I'm not sure it works that way and Baker did what he did because he was trying to confront and catch a shooter.
On TV lately, the first responders for the Columbine shooting were interviewed saying that they made a mistake securing the perimeter and exits and should have gone straight in to confront the shooters.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Joseph McBride - 14-12-2015
FYI, Rufus Youngblood did not jump over the seat and dive on
Johnson as LBJ claimed. See my book INTO THE NIGHTMARE
for a debunking of this myth by Senator Ralph Yarborough, who
was riding in the back seat with LBJ and Lady Bird.
Joseph McBride
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Bob Prudhomme - 14-12-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Bob Prudhomme Wrote:No, the things I list would have prevented a killer from escaping, via the stairs, while Truly and Baker rode the elevator up that they tried to summon.
So you're saying Baker would have let a potential cornered shooter upstairs go uncontrolled and possibly take hostages, or kill employees?
Bob if Baker takes the stairs then he lets the shooter escape via the elevator. If he takes the elevator then he lets the shooter escape via the stairs. I don't think it is reasonable, when Baker was running to confront a shooter, that you insert this planned rationality into Baker's mind as if he was a robo-cop with a computer graphic of the whole situation and all the plays from years of analysis present in consciousness. Your argument makes sense in a sophist analysis of the scenario but it isn't really realistic in real time. I think you are trying to force Murphy over the real events.
Your argument is basically because my years-long analysis of Baker conforms to the best police practices that therefore Baker would and should have practiced them. I'm not sure it works that way and Baker did what he did because he was trying to confront and catch a shooter.
On TV lately, the first responders for the Columbine shooting were interviewed saying that they made a mistake securing the perimeter and exits and should have gone straight in to confront the shooters.
Note, in your last sentence, the use of the word "they". Yes, if you have the numbers, charge the building and confront the bad guys. But common sense dictates it is rather foolish for a one man "gang" to believe he can "corner" a perpetrator in such a large building, all by himself.
Despite what television shows tell you, law enforcement agencies do not really like the Rambo types, as one man lacks the firepower to effectively subdue a perpetrator, and he often ends up getting hurt or killed himself, and getting others hurt or killed. They tend to create mountains of paperwork, and raise the long term disability insurance premiums.
The proper procedure would have been to follow the chain of command by:
1. Informing his superiors of the situation.
2. Requesting additional forces to secure the building.
3. If possible, utilize existing manpower at the scene to secure all exits.
4. When additional forces arrive, hand over all relevant information to the leader of these forces, and offer assistance in any subsequent plan to locate the perpetrator.
How would one man charging into Columbine have altered the outcome, other than adding himself to the list of casualties?
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Drew Phipps - 15-12-2015
For Columbine, I would suggest that a trained police officer could have safely dispatched a couple of untrained teenagers. However, in most emergency situations, when you are unsure of the layout or the number and kind of enemies you might face, caution is the standard operating procedure.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Michael Cross - 15-12-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:For Columbine, I would suggest that a trained police officer could have safely dispatched a couple of untrained teenagers.
Columbine had an armed guard on the premises:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/columbine-armed-guards_n_2347096.html
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Albert Doyle - 15-12-2015
I think Bob has a conspicuous theory to Dallas cop going after the shooter ratio that doesn't need further illustration. This was Texas after all and things are done differently down there as we all know. I personally would observe common sense and realize Baker was going after what he thought was an unrestrained shooter. I don't see any need to impose any police tactic extraneous theories on what happened. That strikes me as being motivated by needing to change the scene to fit your preferred scenario rather than any objective look at the events. It's sort of Parkerish in my opinion, no offense intended. To me, trying to impose the idea that common police tactics would have sealed off the building first so therefore Baker's story must be off is an obviously concocted approach that conspicuously tries to apply this completely extraneous, theoretical condition on the Baker story in order to loosen it up, but in reality it is just that, a subjectively applied theory that has even less evidence behind it than the official story it is questioning. It may have no basis what so ever or have any validity by which it should be presented as a demand on those who analyze the scene. Me personally, I think the more Murphy needs the lunch-room encounter to be untrue the more important this building sealing becomes, but that's just my opinion of course.
Why the second floor lunch room encounter could not have happened - Bob Prudhomme - 15-12-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:I think Bob has a conspicuous theory to Dallas cop going after the shooter ratio that doesn't need further illustration. This was Texas after all and things are done differently down there as we all know. I personally would observe common sense and realize Baker was going after what he thought was an unrestrained shooter. I don't see any need to impose any police tactic extraneous theories on what happened. That strikes me as being motivated by needing to change the scene to fit your preferred scenario rather than any objective look at the events. It's sort of Parkerish in my opinion, no offense intended. To me, trying to impose the idea that common police tactics would have sealed off the building first so therefore Baker's story must be off is an obviously concocted approach that conspicuously tries to apply this completely extraneous, theoretical condition on the Baker story in order to loosen it up, but in reality it is just that, a subjectively applied theory that has even less evidence behind it than the official story it is questioning. It may have no basis what so ever or have any validity by which it should be presented as a demand on those who analyze the scene. Me personally, I think the more Murphy needs the lunch-room encounter to be untrue the more important this building sealing becomes, but that's just my opinion of course.
I'll make this as simple as I can for you, Albert. Texas or not, it would be outright stupidity to go charging into the entrance with one man or a dozen men if
1. You had NO idea who, what or how many you were looking for.
2. You did not seal off the entrances first. How stupid would it look for an assassin to walk right out the door after the posse ran right by him? Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened.