02-03-2014, 06:55 PM
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:Arnold maintained she saw Oswald closer to 12:25 on the 1st floor. If he ate his lunch on the 1st floor, he had plenty of time to go to the Coke machine on the 2nd floor, buy a Coke, return to the 1st floor and check out what all the excitement was outside; well before the motorcade arrived at 12:30. Remember, the stairs to the 2nd floor were close to the front entrance of the TSBD. She could have seen him going to or returning from the 2nd floor. One sighting at 12:25 does not place him on the 2nd floor for an extended period of time.
Unless I'm wrong I think Mrs Arnold said she went for her regular drink from the water fountain and saw Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom sitting at the table eating his lunch. Unless of course you are trying to mix references and cite Mrs Arnold's alleged ground floor sighting of Oswald. However I believe there's a clean quote where Mrs Arnold was shown her FBI statement years later and corrected it saying that she said 12:25 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. Also the context was FBI took the liberty to alter it to 12:15 because Oswald had to be upstairs preparing for his shooting at 12:25. That context was clearly in reference to the 2nd floor luchroom so I don't think you are accurately reflecting the facts.
No, one sighting doesn't guarantee a stationary location, however the alternative requires some extreme exposure and movements that simply saying it doesn't place him for an extended period of time doesn't really provide an adequate answer for. That movement would require a series of witnesses for which there are none. If the absence of Oswald on the steps with Victoria Adams exonerates him why doesn't it here?
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:I would explain it the same way I would explain how Baker, in full uniform and a white helmet, ran past Frazier and Frazier has no recollection of it. Judging by where Frazier is seen standing, Baker likely had to push him out of the way, but Frazier draws a total blank on seeing Baker. A good term for it might be "induced amnesia". Also, if Oswald appeared at the last second, those people in front of him would have their full attention on the motorcade.
Well, what about all the others? I think what you are writing is actually proof of the opposite of what you are trying to show. If you queried all of the persons on the front steps as to Baker's charge you would find a majority who witnessed it. Frazier's dubious to begin with, so absence of memory from someone who was tracked down at his father's hospital bed and threatened by the same Dallas Police who murdered many witnesses isn't really saying much. "Induced amnesia" indeed. As I said before and you ignored, if you went to the witness template for other Oswald sightings you would see a strong showing of speaking up from Ralph Yates to Carolyn Arnold, to Bogard, to Roger Craig, to Carousel witnesses seeing Oswald in the shadows, and all the other known Oswald sightings I'm sure you're familiar with. There is no such outward, direct case like Oswald standing right in front of everybody on the Depository front steps, with all the dozens of witnesses who would have seen him right in front of them, without any mention at all. You will find no other exposure of Oswald in the assassination with such a 100% consistency of lack of witnessing. What you are doing is trying to place Lee Harvey Oswald in the Assassination's Times Square at high noon without anyone seeing him. Again, to me this is an obvious common sense issue. I think you are trying to suggest silence by intimidation but it just doesn't play against that overall template. Your scenario still requires Oswald to mingle in with the crowd in the doorway where their attention would be on each other at the Baker juncture. It just doesn't wash Bob.
If you go to the Education Forum and scan the thread you'll see plenty of good blow-ups of Darnell. They are clear enough that there's no bottle in Prayer Man's hand, nor is there any camera.