14-04-2017, 05:29 PM
LR Trotter Wrote:Ray Mitcham Wrote:LR Trotter Wrote:Ray Mitcham Wrote:According to whose established timeline?
Why would you take the word of a DPD officer, who first said that a man he saw on the third or fourth floor "walking away from the stairs", and then changed his mind to say he saw him through the window of a door in another room on another floor?
Is there another reliable evidenced based timeline?
Whose established timeline? (With the emphasis on "established".)
Quote:Without going into detail, I'll take DPD Officer ML Baker's word for the timeline, with additional situational events occurring at the time as well.Circular argument. If Baker says it's right then it must be right.
Which "additional situational events" do you mean?
Quote:Why would I not take his word for the event as it occurred? Him being human and all, and having to enter a building that is indicated to be occupied by a person that has just shot at the POTUS, I would think it would be necessary to review the event and gather his thoughts and recollection.
If you are to take his word then take his first words.
There was no indication that any shots had been fired from the TSDB except for pigeons, allegedly, flying off the roof, which they would have done, from whichever building the shots had been fired.
Apart from Baker and Truly, there is no confirmation of the second floor encounter, and even Baker's first affidavit disagreed with his subsequent testimony.
While standing by my thoughts as posted, I see no need to explain further .However, if it is believed the encounter did not occur ,instead of questioning the conclusion that it did, maybe some eyewitnesses, on the scene, gave provable testimony that it did not, and those eyewitness accounts can be presented.
Right. Which means you can't back up what you said. Got it.