Back to the movies with Julia Postal

[John Iacoletti]

A) they had no cause to arrest him when they approached him in the theater. Or even cause to search him.
>>> https://johnhelms.attorney/how-long-can-the-police-detain-me/
"When police officers detain someone, they have not yet made an arrest. However, when someone is detained by the police, they are not free to simply walk away. Police may detain people in a variety of situations."

Did you actually read the article or just do another one of your legendary ignorant cut and paste jobs?

Not only does “looking funny to a shoe salesman” not constitute reasonable suspicion of murder, but the reasonable suspicion standard didn’t even exist yet in 1963.

Oswald had his 4th Amendment right to ask why he was being detained, searched or even questioned. He could have done this calmly. Instead, he decided to duke it out for some strange reason:

I don’t think there’s anything in the 4th amendment that says “cops can make people do anything they damn well please”, Canuck.

C) the “resisted” box is unmarked on the arrest report.
>>> Judge Johnny: Mr Oswald, were all the right boxes checked on the arrest report?
Mr. Oswald: No, sir.
Judge Johnny: Okay, you're free to go.

Judge: why does the official arrest report not mention Oswald assaulting an officer, or resisting arrest, or that an officer was injured?

McDonald: well, your honor, at that time I hadn’t made up that particular story yet.

[Bill Chapman]

Did you actually read the article or just do another one of your legendary ignorant cut and paste jobs?
>>> By all means feel free to show how my 'c&p jobs' qualify as 'ignorant'
 
Not only does “looking funny to a shoe salesman” not constitute reasonable suspicion of murder, but the reasonable suspicion standard didn’t even exist yet in 1963.
>>> Brewer was an alert citizen who became reasonably suspicious without needing to wait for permission from any law.   

I don’t think there’s anything in the 4th amendment that says “cops can make people do anything they damn well please”, Canuck.
>>> 'Canuck', LOL... you wouldn't be trying to claim my cite was from Canadian Law, now would you, JudgeJohhny?

My cite is from an American lawyer, Tex.
Law Office of John M. Helms
8100 John W. Carpenter Fwy.
Suite #201, Dallas, TX 75247
October 21, 2019 by johnhelmslaw   

Judge: why does the official arrest report not mention Oswald assaulting an officer, or resisting arrest, or that an officer was injured?
McDonald: well, your honor, at that time I hadn’t made up that particular story yet.
>>> JudgeJohnny: All the witnesses were lying anyway. I know that because I said so.

EDIT (TYPO): 'Damn well please'

[Jack Trojan]

Those DPD were crackerjack alright. JFK gets shot at 12.30 and they apprehended Oswald 1 hour later in the theater. Fritz was a fricken genius!

Doesn't anyone else think the discovery of the murder weapon and converging on Oswald at the theater was a bit too expedient, especially for the Keystone Cop DPD?

ETA: How the hell did Hoover know so much about everything less than 24 hrs after the Big Event?

[Thomas Graves]

Those DPD were crackerjack alright. JFK gets shot at 12.30 and they apprehend Oswald 1 hour later in the theater. Fritz was a fricken genius!

Doesn't anyone else think the discovery of the murder weapon and converging on Oswald at the theater was a bit too expedient, especially for the Keystone Cop DPD?

ETA: How the hell did Hoover know so much about everything less than 24 hrs after the Big Event?

It must have been a conspiracy!

[Jack Trojan]

It must have been a conspiracy!

Or Fritz was a genius who handled crucial evidence with his bare hands and staged the crime scene of the century...or the evil evil KGB did it. Which way are you leaning Tommy?

[Thomas Graves]

Or Fritz was a genius who handled crucial uhcevidence with his bare hands and staged the crime scene of the century...or the evil evil KGB did it. Which way are you leaning Tommy?

Jack,

I thought I'd posted somewhere that I believe Oswald, being more Marxist-Leninist than Khrushchev, himself, and being thoroughly fed up with life in the USSR and in America (and maybe even at being "used" by both CIA-FBI and the KGB), decided to take matters into his own hands and ... gasp ... advance "The Dialectic," which, of course, the KGB has been more than happy over the years to blame on Far-Right Southern Oilmen and The Minutemen, and/or the Military Industrial Complex, and/or the Military Industrial Intelligence Community Complex, and/or Rogue Elements In The CIA And The Whole Dallas Police Department, and/or The All-Encompassing FBI-and-CIA-Enforced "Deep State," or on Reptile Aliens and Jimi Hendrix Haters, ... or some-such thing.

Whatever could best serve the promulgation of tinfoil hat conspiracy theories in general, the concomitant dumbing down of American society, and the paving of the way to our eventually "electing" a pro-Kremlin useful idiot like Donald Trump to the Presidency so that he or she could (unwittingly, I guess) lead us into a Full-On Bump-Stocked Civil War?

D'oh

--  MWT 

[John Iacoletti]

Did you actually read the article or just do another one of your legendary ignorant cut and paste jobs?
>>> By all means feel free to show how my 'c&p jobs' qualify as 'ignorant'

As in this case, you paste something that doesn’t even address the point being made. Strike 1. (do Canadians understand baseball metaphors?)
 

Not only does “looking funny to a shoe salesman” not constitute reasonable suspicion of murder, but the reasonable suspicion standard didn’t even exist yet in 1963.
>>> Brewer was an alert citizen who became reasonably suspicious without needing to wait for permission from any law.   

How does that have anything to do with probable cause to search or arrest someone for murder? Strike 2.

I don’t think there’s anything in the 4th amendment that says “cops can make people do anything they da hmn well please”, Canuck.
>>> 'Canuck', LOL... you wouldn't be trying to claim my cite was from Canadian Law, now would you, JudgeJohhny?

Why, no, I wouldn’t. I was referring to your pontification about the United States Constitution. And I didn’t say “da hmn well please”. How dare you alter the blue box? This is an outrage. Strike 3.

>>> JudgeJohnny: All the witnesses were lying anyway. I know that because I said so.

Is that supposed to be me? I never said that all the witnesses were lying. That would be strike 4, but you’re already out.

On the other hand, you’re cherry-picking one witness on the other side of a dark theater because you like what he claimed.