Monday, January 18, 2016

This testimony by Charles Givens is quite valuable. The last statement reads that Givens saw Oswald in the domino room reading the newspaper at 11:50. That would have been the beginning of the lunch break. So if true (and I have no reason to doubt it) it means that Oswald went directly to the domino room when the lunch break began. And he apparently grabbed a newspaper right away, as was his habit. But, don't you think that he grabbed that newspaper in conjunction with eating lunch? Don't you think that he was really there to eat lunch? And since it was 11:50, don't you think he got started eating lunch straight-away? And since it was just a cheese sandwich and an apple, don't you think he finished eating long before 12:30? 

I'm citing this because Will Fritz told the WC that Oswald said he was eating lunch with "other employees" at the time of the shooting, which means at 12:30.  But, that is ridiculous.  If Oswald was already in the lunch room at 11:50, then surely he was done eating before 12:30. And Oswald never said he was eating with anyone; that wasn't his style. He was a loner. He wasn't a lone nut, but he was indeed a loner. But, it is inconceivable that he was still engaged in eating at 12:30 if he arrived at the lunch room prepared to eat at 11:50. What Fritz said was a lie, and this statement by Charles Givens confirms it.  

But, what about the statement that Givens made that he saw a "picture" of Oswald on television? Would he have said that if he was talking about live footage of Oswald? I rather doubt it. Wouldn't he have just said he saw him on television? So, maybe he really did mean a picture, that is, a photograph. What photographs of Oswald were shown on television that day? Well, at 5:30 Central time, Walter Conkrite showed this image of Oswald on television:

Do you think that's what Givens was referring to? If not, what? Live footage is not a picture. Live footage is live footage. If he saw Oswald in motion in current time, that is a not a picture. A picture is a static thing, a fixed image. So, if it wasn't this picture, then what picture of Oswald was it? This was definitely a picture of Oswald. Notice that it is extremely poor quality- and it was deliberately made so. Still, Givens may have recognized Oswald's clothes from what he wore that day. 

"He said he saw this same person's picture on television..."

No comments:

Post a Comment

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