Monday, October 28, 2013

Let's bottom-line this. There is no tear in the margin of Oswald's t-shirt as we look at it from the front. 




Is that a tear on his left shoulder? If it is, it's more like a hole than a tear. It does not extend to the margin. Therefore, it cannot be having any effect on what the margin is doing. So, it is irrelevant, even if it is a tear.




So, is that a tear or just a thin spot in the fabric? Here it looks like just a thin spot to me. But again, it doesn't matter because the margin is intact. 

Now, we can't see the back of the t-shirt, but there is no conclusive evidence that the margin was torn in back either. But even if it was, why would that cause the margin to descend in front? It wouldn't. 

The bottom line is that no tearing anywhere, whether imaginary or real, can be used to explain the vee-ish tendency of Oswald's t-shirt, and at times, it was decidedly vee-ish.


The vee-ish tendency was there, and it was there before the scuffle at the theater. It was the result of Oswald's habit of tugging on it. The kind of violent action that is assumed to have occurred at the theater would have caused overt damage, not the remolding of the margin that took place over time from the regular exercise Oswald gave it. 

But again, it is only an assumption and unwarranted one that the t-shirt got torn at the theater. Oswald was wearing his outer shirt over his t-shirt at the theater. So, how could the t-shirt be grabbed and torn? You can see above what was available for the grabbing, and there is definitely no tear there. 

Fools also try to claim that Oswald's buttons got torn off in the fight too. Fortunately, Mrs. Bledsoe saw him on the bus with his shirt unbuttoned and with his buttons missing. That was before the theater action. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.