The number one CT nightmare question ...

[Jorn Frending]

You haven't shown that in any way whatsoever.  You've just speculated on what you thought conspirators would do.

It's called "ANALYZING" 

It's been done in order to narrow down options based on the frequent CT premise that Oswald was framed according to a carefully elaborated plan being "OBLIVIOUS" of anything strange to take place that day.

Both CT's and LN's alike have contributed greatly to this thread and so far nobody has been able to refute the idea that Oswald could not have been framed had he not carried out some kind of planned voluntary action knowingly or not of the consequences.

However, if you do not agree, you are welcome to offer an alternative theory.

In any case the conclusion still allows for having a CT point of view ...

[John Iacoletti]

WOW!

So in this short post we have even more liars, Brennan, Fritz, Day, Givens, etc etc, it never ends.

What an extreme way to build a case but at least you're convincing yourself?

No, I'm just pointing out that the actual evidence doesn't support the claims that you continue to make about it.  If you find "cop said so" to be compelling evidence then you should take Chief Curry's word for it.

[John Iacoletti]

It's called "ANALYZING" 

It's been done in order to narrow down options based on the frequent CT premise that Oswald was framed according to a carefully elaborated plan being "OBLIVIOUS" of anything strange to take place that day.

If this premise is so frequent, then can you cite a single example of it being made on this forum?

Both CT's and LN's alike have contributed greatly to this thread and so far nobody has been able to refute the idea that Oswald could not have been framed had he not carried out some kind of planned voluntary action knowingly or not of the consequences.

So you're asking the participants here to prove a negative?  Isn't that special?

However, if you do not agree, you are welcome to offer an alternative theory.

Actually what I'd like to see is you making an actual case that Oswald could not have been framed had he not carried out some kind of planned voluntary action, rather than just stating it as an axiom and demanding that it be disproven.

[John Mytton]

If you find "cop said so" to be compelling evidence then you should take Chief Curry's word for it.

Curry said in his book that there was enough evidence to charge Oswald with the Murder of Officer Tippit.
And as for what else Curry said, maybe you can find the passage in his book that supports your statement?

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Curry said in his book that there was enough evidence to charge Oswald with the Murder of Officer Tippit.
And as for what else Curry said, maybe you can find the passage in his book that supports your statement?

Not in his book.  The quote is from a November 6, 1969 Dallas Morning News article by Tom Johnson.

[John Mytton]

Not in his book.  The quote is from a November 6, 1969 Dallas Morning News article by Tom Johnson.

Oh, it's hearsay, no worries.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Oh, it's hearsay, no worries.

Not if Curry said it directly to Johnson.