The preponderance of the evidence

[Charles Collins]

Sure.  Do you have any evidence that he ever practiced with this rifle?

Or maybe that rifle was never in that bag.

I previously stated that I was making no claims. Just asking questions.

If it was never in that bag, why would Jack indicate that the rifle had to be reassembled and the scope adjusted?

[John Iacoletti]

Evidence of anyone trying to make LHO a patsy (scapegoat) would be evidence of a conspiracy. Do you have any?

Yes. The unfair lineups, the disappearing initials on shells, and the magic partial palm print that shows up a week later. Just to name a few.

[John Iacoletti]

I previously stated that I was making no claims. Just asking questions.

Where?s Chapman when you need him?

If it was never in that bag, why would Jack indicate that the rifle had to be reassembled and the scope adjusted?

Because the LN narrative would demand it.

[Charles Collins]

Yes. The unfair lineups, the disappearing initials on shells, and the magic partial palm print that shows up a week later. Just to name a few.

Not what I asked for.

[Charles Collins]

Where?s Chapman when you need him?

Because the LN narrative would demand it.

Please explain both responses.

[Bill Chapman]

I don't know how the WC would go about convincing anyone that he was believable as killer either.

Probably didn't have to frame anybody.

[Martin Weidmann]

Not what I asked for.

Exactly what you asked for?. what happened to the "open mind"?

There is a circumstantial case to be made for LHO (regardless of his guilt or innocence) being set up as a patsy. It's visible for anybody who wants to see?.