Why did they let a Patsy have a Press Conference?

[Mike Orr]

Could Ruby have been a "  Manchurian Candidate " ? He said in an interview that he could not remember  anything that happened from the time he was at the bottom of the ramp until he was wrestled down on the floor after the shooting of Oswald . What did Oswald want to tell the Warren Commission in DC if taken back to the capital that he could not tell them in Dallas ?

[Mark A. Oblazney]

100 percent spot on.

totally agree.  patsy points for that one. thanks.

[Mark A. Oblazney]

There was also a legitimate opportunity to "silence" Oswald in the Texas Theatre when he resisted arrest and pulled a gun on an officer.  A golden opportunity but those sly conspirators decide to arrest him, allow him to speak freely to the press, then recruit an unstable nut and rely on him to spend the rest of his life in jail without talking.   What a plan.  This is all a great example of no good deed going unpunished.  The DPD attempted to be as transparent as possible.  That resulted in chaos that unintentionally created security risks.

[Dan O'meara]

Oswald says "they've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union, I'm just a Patsy", even though Oswald gives a reason why he's a Patsy, a lot of CT's still endorse Oswald's Patsy comment as having a different meaning but unfortunately what that meaning is, usually isn't defined.

Anyway, Oswald gave his Patsy comment on the Friday* yet they still let loose cannon Oswald walk through Media infested hallways and then they give Oswald the platform of a Midnight Press Conference, so after Oswald proves that he is willing to spill the beans, they still let Oswald speak to the Press?

This proves in reality that the Dallas Police couldn't give a stuff what Oswald said because even by then, Oswald's sole guilt was more than established.

And don't forget they let Oswald speak to his wife.
And they let Oswald speak to his mother.
And they let Oswald speak to his brother.
Some conspiracy?!

*7:50 P.M.  Friday 22nd
Lineup for Witness J. D. Davis
"I have been dressed differently than the other three. . . . Don't you know the difference? I still have on the same clothes I was arrested in. The other two were prisoners, already in jail." Seth Kantor, reporter, heard Oswald yell, "I am only a patsy."
https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/LHO.html

JohnM

"Oswald says "they've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union, I'm just a Patsy"

Really?
Or does he say, "they've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a Patsy"
Two very different things.
Your interpretation, that his 'Patsy' comment was connected to his 'Soviet Union' comment is undermined by Kantor's recollection that he heard the 'Patsy' comment unrelated to any reference to the Soviet Union.

[John Corbett]

"Oswald says "they've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union, I'm just a Patsy"

Really?
Or does he say, "they've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a Patsy"
Two very different things.
Your interpretation, that his 'Patsy' comment was connected to his 'Soviet Union' comment is undermined by Kantor's recollection that he heard the 'Patsy' comment unrelated to any reference to the Soviet Union.

However, you want to interpret Oswald's claim, it's  . Oswald was not a patsy. The evidence is conclusive that he was the one who fired the shots that killed JFK and in 62+ years, no one has found any credible evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in his crime.

[Dan O'meara]

However, you want to interpret Oswald's claim, it's  . Oswald was not a patsy. The evidence is conclusive that he was the one who fired the shots that killed JFK and in 62+ years, no one have found any credible evidence Oswald had even a single accomplice in his crime.

As has already been established, John, you believe your interpretation of the evidence is a fact. You are unaware that what you believe is just your opinion.
You psychologically cannot accept that Oswald taking the shots is just a theory.
One one hand I find the level of your Denial quite disturbing but at least you are up front about unlike certain Nutters who like to pretend they are 'free thinkers' when, in fact, they are as rabidly zealous about their beliefs as you are.

We literally have nothing to discuss as you are incapable of any rational discussion.

[John Corbett]

As has already been established, John, you believe your interpretation of the evidence is a fact. You are unaware that what you believe is just your opinion.

It is a fact that Oswald killed JFK. The fact that some won't accept that does not change that fact.

You psychologically cannot accept that Oswald taking the shots is just a theory.

In the same sense that gravity is just a theory.

One one hand I find the level of your Denial quite disturbing but at least you are up front about unlike certain Nutters who like to pretend they are 'free thinkers' when, in fact, they are as rabidly zealous about their beliefs as you are.

We literally have nothing to discuss as you are incapable of any rational discussion.

The time for being open minded about Oswald's guilt expired a long time ago. Almost 62 years ago.

i can't quote Bugliosi exactly but he stated that if a person doesn't believe Oswald was JFK's assassin, either they are unfamiliar with the evidence against him, or they are very silly. I agree whole heartedly with that assessment.