How do we evaluate sworn witness testimony? Again, for KD on EF reply…

KD said: 

She was was a traumatized spouse, who was handled gently in questioning under oath. Some of her testimony was not included in the material originally released to the public.

 Kellerman was straight forward, contradicted the official line re the number of shots,and timing, and had a vigorous exchange under oath.

 In regard to your post above, you are not a witness. Did you give a sworn deposition? You are someone claiming something which contradicts facts. 

 

 

I originally said:

Are all witness statements created equal?  (Just for Mr. Davies…)

 

Here are a few excerpts from Jackie Kennedy’s sworn testimony to the Warren Commission:

 

JK: “…my husband never made any sound.”

“You know, then, there were pictures later on of me climbing out the back.  But I don’t remember that at all.” 5H+E, p. 180

 

JK: “No, there weren’t any words. There was just Govenor Connally’s. And then I suppose Mrs. Connally was sort of crying and covering her husband.  But I don’t remember any words.  And there was a big windshield between — you know–I think.  Isn’t there?

Rankin: Between the seats.

JK: “So you know, those poor men in the front, you couldn’t hear them.” 5H+E, p. 181

 

With all due respect, once again, in my book that is called ‘cherrypicking’.  Not only do you appear to pick and choose what suits you and discard the rest, first you appear to claim ‘sworn testimony’ cannot be false and then make excuses for sworn testimony that doesn’t seem to suit your needs. 

 

And have you not now added yet another personal caveat — namely, that only those who give a deposition can be called a ‘witness’?  What about all the witnesses at DP who were not called to give testimony, most likely because what they would have said was not what the WC wanted to hear?  What about the PH witnesses who claimed they saw a hole in the limo windshield?  How are we to weigh and evaluate their statements?

 

How do you perceive your research method to be moving things forward? 

 

What if we were to agree that even sworn witness testimony can be incorrect, either intentionally (as I think may be true in the case of Kellerman claiming he heard JFK talk when Jackie, who sat next to him, did not) or unintentionally (such as Jackie thinking there was a privacy window installed in SS100X on 11.22.63, when in fact there was one in her duplicate limo, SS279X, but the one present at delivery of SS100X was removed three months later)?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s