Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Martin Weidmann]

Or the man they saw was Oswald.  Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?  That seems like the bigger concern than just wanting to convict anyone for the crime because they were distraught and wanted resolution.

Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?

Nope. It happened (and still does happen) all the time.

How else do you explain the large number of people who were later exonerated because of the ongoing work of the innocence project and others?

[Michael Capasse]

Or the man they saw was Oswald.  Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?  That seems like the bigger concern than just wanting to convict anyone for the crime because they were distraught and wanted resolution.

Mr. CALLAWAY.  And he said, "We want to be sure, we want to try to wrap him up real tight on killing this officer. We think he is the same one that shot the President. But if we can wrap him up tight on killing this officer, we have got him."

Ever wonder why Helen Markharm was crying hysterically as the cops were screaming at her to make her choice at the 1st line up
A blonde guy in a sport coat, another guy in a suit vest and a third in a button down sweater. Oh yea, Lee in a ragged t-shirt, w/ bruises on his face.

Who will she not choose?

[Richard Smith]

Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?

Nope. It happened (and still does happen) all the time.

How else do you explain the large number of people who were later exonerated because of the ongoing work of the innocence project and others?

Can eyewitness testimony ever be wrong says the contrarian!  Yes.  What are the odds, however, that multiple witnesses are wrong?  That Oswald would have a gun in his possession at the movie theatre?  That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?  That he would draw his gun and engage in a fight with the police before even learning what they wanted? That he would be acting so suspiciously as to draw the attention of random citizens?  Verdict = Guilty.  Here is where the contrarian tells me all this evidence is an "assumption" but that he is not suggesting a conspiracy.  Just that everyone was lying to implicate Oswald for no apparent reason. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Can eyewitness testimony ever be wrong says the contrarian!  Yes.  What are the odds, however, that multiple witnesses are wrong?  That Oswald would have a gun in his possession at the movie theatre?  That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?  That he would draw his gun and engage in a fight with the police before even learning what they wanted? That he would be acting so suspiciously as to draw the attention of random citizens?  Verdict = Guilty.  Here is where the contrarian tells me all this evidence is an "assumption" but that he is not suggesting a conspiracy.  Just that everyone was lying to implicate Oswald for no apparent reason.

Can eyewitness testimony ever be wrong says the contrarian!  Yes.

So we agree on that. That's progress

What are the odds, however, that multiple witnesses are wrong? 

Wrong question. What are the odds that all witnesses identify the same person in a correctly conducted line up? That should be the question. There is no way that every single witness is able to identify the same person. Case in point; Scoggins "identified" Oswald in the DPD line up but was unable to identify him from a picture to the FBI the very next day.

That Oswald would have a gun in his possession at the movie theatre?

Did he? Says who?

That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?

Which they only "found" on the third time they searched him...... 

That he would draw his gun and engage in a fight with the police before even learning what they wanted?

Did he? Says who?

That he would be acting so suspiciously as to draw the attention of random citizens?

Yeah, pretty stupid to draw attention to yourself, if you actually just killed two people, right? The only thing missing is a flashing neon sign saying "here I am, come and get me"....

Verdict = Guilty.

Says the self-appointed jury, judge and executioner.....

Here is where the contrarian tells me all this evidence is an "assumption"

What evidence? All this is, is complete and utter BS from a propagandist who hasn't got any evidence.

Just that everyone was lying to implicate Oswald for no apparent reason.

Lying about what?

You're all over the place. Get a grip, man and present something with substance.

[John Iacoletti]

What are the odds that “Richard” will rattle off a list of claims that he cannot substantiate, and state them as facts?

100%

“Contrarian” is whiny-LN-speak for “waah, stop asking me to provide evidence for my claims”.

[John Iacoletti]

That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?

Which they only "found" on the third time they searched him...... 

And when they did, they only found one brand of ammo. “Richard” is wrong again.

[Richard Smith]

Can eyewitness testimony ever be wrong says the contrarian!  Yes.

So we agree on that. That's progress

What are the odds, however, that multiple witnesses are wrong? 

Wrong question. What are the odds that all witnesses identify the same person in a correctly conducted line up? That should be the question. There is no way that every single witness is able to identify the same person. Case in point; Scoggins "identified" Oswald in the DPD line up but was unable to identify him from a picture to the FBI the very next day.

That Oswald would have a gun in his possession at the movie theatre?

Did he? Says who?

That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?

Which they only "found" on the third time they searched him...... 

That he would draw his gun and engage in a fight with the police before even learning what they wanted?

Did he? Says who?

That he would be acting so suspiciously as to draw the attention of random citizens?

Yeah, pretty stupid to draw attention to yourself, if you actually just killed two people, right? The only thing missing is a flashing neon sign saying "here I am, come and get me"....

Verdict = Guilty.

Says the self-appointed jury, judge and executioner.....

Here is where the contrarian tells me all this evidence is an "assumption"

What evidence? All this is, is complete and utter BS from a propagandist who hasn't got any evidence.

Just that everyone was lying to implicate Oswald for no apparent reason.

Lying about what?

You're all over the place. Get a grip, man and present something with substance.

"Lying about what?"  The DPD indicates that Oswald had a gun in the TT.  Were they "lying about that"?  The DPD confirms that they searched Oswald and discovered the same two brands of ammo on his person that were used to kill Tippit.  Were the "lying about that"?  The DPD and witnesses in the TT indicate that Oswald tried to pull his gun and engaged in a struggle when approached in the TT.  Were all these folks "lying about that"?  Brewer indicated that Oswald drew his attention by acting suspiciously?  Was he "lying about that?"  Does that help?