Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"

[Martin Weidmann]

Here we have another CTer who is incapable of "Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22. (I.E., the things that unquestionably "Add Up" to LHO's guilt in the two murders he committed in Dallas on November 22nd.)

But, then too, I've known for many years that the individual named Cakebread has never been any good at all when it comes to mathematics, especially addition. He takes after his fellow goofy conspiracy fantasist, Ben Holmes, in that regard.

"Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22

Translation for "adding up" is making assumptions to "connect" one thing somehow "unusual" with another thing somehow "unusual".

But perhaps you can help us out here, David.

For about six months now, I have been asking Richard Smith to provide evidence for his claims that (1) Oswald was on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and (2) that he came down the stairs unnoticed within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot. Richard told me to look at up in the WC report, but I couldn't find any evidence to support either claim in Chapter 4, which deals with the assassin.

All I could find is that the WC somehow considered the presence of the MC rifle (allegedly bought by Oswald) on the 6th floor as proof that Oswald was there when the shots were fired, which is, on so many levels, completely absurd.

Do you, David, know of any evidence that puts Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and/or that he did indeed come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot?

[David Von Pein]

Do you, David, know of any evidence that puts Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and/or that he did indeed come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot?

Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day--including 11/22/63--please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there---especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.

No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.

[Bill Chapman]

Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day--including 11/22/63--please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there---especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.

No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.

That outta set IaLOLetti's (aka Nick Beef) hair on fire

[John Iacoletti]

How about a simple example for our contrarians?  Let's say there were three people named Martin, Roger, and Otto who all lived in Dallas and left their wedding rings at home on 11.22.63.  Would this alone make them suspects in the assassination?  Of course not.  No one ever has ever made this claim about Oswald.  But suppose "Martin" also worked in the building from which the shots were fired, his rifle is found there, his prints were on the SN boxes, rifle, and long bag, he had no credible alibi, fled the scene, got a gun, shot a policer officer, resisted arrest, and told the DPD numerous lies.

In fact, none of those thing are evidence of murder, even if you could actually show that they are true (which you cannot).

Martin's act of leaving his wedding ring at home that very day gains greater significance in the totality of context with the other evidence and circumstances.

No, the “significance” is in the imagination of the person who has just decided that it must be significant.

[John Iacoletti]

Here we have another CTer who is incapable of "Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22.

Doing “unusual” things is not evidence of murder. It’s what people who don’t have any good evidence appeal to and hope that their rhetoric will be persuasive anyway. It’s a form of pounding the table.

[John Iacoletti]

Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And Howard Brennan failed to make a positive ID in a lineup that was egregiously unfair and biased to begin with, even after seeing Oswald on TV, and embellished his story more and more every time he told it — whether WC fanatics like it or not.

But just so we’re clear, Brennan’s belated “certainty” is your only evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor during the shooting, right? Unlike “Richard”, are you willing to admit that?

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM,

And if it’s not to be believed (and there are good reasons not to) then that means there is no reason to believe that Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 — one of those reasons being, what plausible way could he have gotten down in that timeframe unnoticed? You’re coming dangerously close to “Richard’s” insipid argument that the evidence Oswald came down the stairs in about 75 seconds unnoticed by at least 12 people along the way is that it happened.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not.

Even if you could establish that as a fact (and you cannot), that tells you exactly nothing about where Oswald was at 12:30. You can’t even establish that rifle as the murder weapon, much less who owned it. Being “stubborn” has nothing to do with it. You don’t have the goods, and false bravado hardly makes up for it.

[Bill Chapman]

The murder weapon is not necessarily needed to convict in this case, the lights on the stairway were dangerously dim, the stairs themselves were creaky as hell, Garner said there was chaos and confusion everywhere, and Brennan died years before his book was even published, leaving his writer wannabe plenty of time to 'get creative'.