Sean Murphy's research deserves more

[David Josephs]

So why then does Baker and Truly go so out of their way to remove the Coke from his hands in their story?

Is it to shorten the time line?

It makes sense that the plotters realized the Coke was significant of Oswald being settled-in to the lunch room for an unknown period. It is also possible the controllers knew Oswald was settled-in to the lunch room for the duration of the shooting and had to remove all evidence of this. Carolyn Arnold sees Oswald chowing down at say 12:24. Baker sees him with the Coca Cola he bought to wash it down. Logic puts Oswald in the lunch room between those two things. The evidence is the conspiracy. The need to remove the Coca Cola Mrs Reid witnessed is incriminating. It could be Oswald told too many people he was in the lunch room in the police station so once they realized he had been witnessed by too many people they inserted it back into the story.


Think about how much time the purchase of the Coca Cola takes out of the dash from the 6th floor. It also bridges Carolyn Arnold's sighting with Baker's.

We really need to agree that the Oswald Reid sees is NOT the man Ruby kills.

That the lunchroom scene never occurs and that we don't know who was on the stairs re: Baker's affidavit, and Truly also sees this person per Baker yet is never asked about it.
Baker's affidavit is completely ignored. As opposed to the affidavits of Boone and Weitzman which need to be refuted, repeatedly....

It was pointed out the Arnold denies saying he was near the front door, years later, as why would she be looking back...
Depends on what is believed about which story told when....

The PM location has to be the worst place to see the motorcade... and we know that Lovelady is cut off from revealing who it may be