The Patsy

[John Iacoletti]

The power of the LNer position is that they have a narrative for the events of the day.

There's nothing particularly "powerful" about making up a narrative that they cannot substantiate with reliable evidence.

As far as consensus is concerned I'd also like to propose the following starting point - that Oswald was a "Patsy". He was deeply involved in he events of that day but was unaware he was going to be taking the rap for it. As such, Oswald was not involved in the actual shooting of JFK.

Sure.  All it takes to get there would be to demonstrate that Oswald was deeply involved in the events of that day.

[John Iacoletti]

Actually, yes. Listen to what he says before the patsy line. He's clearly referring to his stint in the USSR.

Two separate sentences.  LN evangelists always think that their subjective assumptions are "clear".

[John Iacoletti]

Cherryholmes wrote a lot of things. Especially in his book written years after Brennans death (Thus no Brennan around to proofread)

More Chapman BS.  You don't know when the book was written.

[John Iacoletti]

CTers are awfully quick to call people liars; in fact one of your ilk insists that if somebody turns out to be wrong about something he truly believes then he is a liar (instead of just wrong).

Says the guy who accuses Frazier and Randle of lying about the length of the package.

[Dan O'meara]

Sure.  All it takes to get there would be to demonstrate that Oswald was deeply involved in the events of that day.

Great point John.
To be honest, it's an assumption I'm making that I link to him being a patsy. It's never crossed my mind to consider Oswald a completely innocent bystander and I can see that is an assumption that has just crept into my thinking.

In this thread I've presented an argument that the evidence relating to who the man on the 6th floor was just before, during and after the assassination, points away from Oswald.

Can we start from this point - that the shooter was not Oswald?

[Mike Orr]

With LHO being given the " We have to make the people believe that Oswald was a lone assassin " tag from J. Edgar Hoover & Nicholas Katzenbach then it became clear that the wheels of injustice were starting to turn at a high rate of speed . LHO said he was a " Patsy " and there are many who believe just that ! The chain of evidence never existed in the murder of JFK .

[John Iacoletti]

Great point John.
To be honest, it's an assumption I'm making that I link to him being a patsy. It's never crossed my mind to consider Oswald a completely innocent bystander and I can see that is an assumption that has just crept into my thinking.

In this thread I've presented an argument that the evidence relating to who the man on the 6th floor was just before, during and after the assassination, points away from Oswald.

Can we start from this point - that the shooter was not Oswald?

Yes! The rational approach is to start with the null hypothesis until conclusive evidence demonstrates otherwise.