Did Marina have a reason to claim the MC rifle belonged to Lee?

[Richard Smith]

Well, let's see just how bad "Richard"'s ignorance really is.

Let's say, somebody steals "Richard"'s identity and uses it to order, out of pure malice, an item, via the internet, at a mail order company.
The mail order company then sends the item to the address on the order form and sends the bill, by e-mail, to "Richard".
He receives the bill and contacts the mail order company saying that he never ordered or received anything, to which the mail order company replies; "well, according to our business records" you have ordered and received the item. Would you like to see the internal document?"

Going by "Richard"'s so-called "logic" he would have no choice but to pay the bill, right? After all, the mail order's business records is conclusive proof of shipment, right?

What a stupid analogy to Oswald's situation.  The Klein's records indicate that the rifle in this instance was shipped TO OSWALD"S PO Box.  Not to someone else's address. Good grief. LOL.  You yourself argued that a mail order business would keep a record of their transactions in case there was an issue.  And it turns out Klein's did exactly that.  They kept a business record of the transaction confirming that they mailed a rifle to Oswald's PO Box on March 20.  Why would they not have mailed it to his address as you stupidly and baselessly imply?  Of course, this record is not the only evidence to confirm that Oswald received this rifle.  His own wife confirms he obtained a rifle in this timeframe.  The rifle shipped to his PO Box turns up in his place of employment.  It has the same serial number as the rifle sent to him by Klein's.  The DPD indicates that Oswald's print was left on that rifle.  There is no accounting for any other rifle belonging to Oswald in this timeframe.  He is pictured holding the rifle.  Experts confirm the rifle depicted in that photo is the same rifle found in the TSBD which is the same rifle that Klein's confirms was sent to Oswald's PO box.  The totality of evidence and circumstances here is conclusive of the fact that Oswald was sent and received a specific rifle.  The same one found at the TSBD on Nov. 22.

[Martin Weidmann]

What a stupid analogy to Oswald's situation.  The Klein's records indicate that the rifle in this instance was shipped TO OSWALD"S PO Box.  Not to someone else's address. Good grief. LOL.  You yourself argued that a mail order business would keep a record of their transactions in case there was an issue.  And it turns out Klein's did exactly that.  They kept a business record of the transaction confirming that they mailed a rifle to Oswald's PO Box on March 20.  Why would they not have mailed it to his address as you stupidly and baselessly imply?  Of course, this record is not the only evidence to confirm that Oswald received this rifle.  His own wife confirms he obtained a rifle in this timeframe.  The rifle shipped to his PO Box turns up in his place of employment.  It has the same serial number as the rifle sent to him by Klein's.  The DPD indicates that Oswald's print was left on that rifle.  There is no accounting for any other rifle belonging to Oswald in this timeframe.  He is pictured holding the rifle.  Experts confirm the rifle depicted in that photo is the same rifle found in the TSBD which is the same rifle that Klein's confirms was sent to Oswald's PO box.  The totality of evidence and circumstances here is conclusive of the fact that Oswald was sent and received a specific rifle.  The same one found at the TSBD on Nov. 22.

So many words, repeated as a broken record, and - as expected - no answer to my hypothetical question

[Richard Smith]

So many words, repeated as a broken record, and - as expected - no answer to my hypothetical question

You can tell when the contrarian brothers are running scared.  LOL.  Martin went on and on about how Klein's would have kept a business record of the shipment of the rifle.  And they did!  Now he is on to the record not proving a rifle was sent.  Imagine that scenario.  Klein's - a mail order business - receives an order for a rifle with a specific address.  Their records confirm that they process this order and even confirm the shipping date and method to that address.  Martin stupidly argues that this doesn't mean they shipped the rifle to that address.  His evidence for such?  None.  Would there be any logical reason for Klein's not to have shipped the rifle to the address designated on the order form?  Of course not.  What does Martin believe happened here?  We have no idea because he lives in a contrarian fantasy world where no fact that lends itself to Oswald's guilt can be acknowledged.  An order is received and processed as reflected in Klein's business records.  Oswald receives a rifle.  The rifle found at Oswald's place of employment is the same one shipped to him by Klein's.  But that is not sufficient in the delusional contrarian world to prove that Oswald was sent the rifle. 

[John Iacoletti]

“Richard” thinks that repeating the same failed arguments without addressing (or even acknowledging) their shortcomings somehow makes them more convincing. Anybody can make a circle on a piece of paper. It confirms “nothing”.

[Martin Weidmann]

You can tell when the contrarian brothers are running scared.  LOL.  Martin went on and on about how Klein's would have kept a business record of the shipment of the rifle.  And they did!  Now he is on to the record not proving a rifle was sent.  Imagine that scenario.  Klein's - a mail order business - receives an order for a rifle with a specific address.  Their records confirm that they process this order and even confirm the shipping date and method to that address.  Martin stupidly argues that this doesn't mean they shipped the rifle to that address.  His evidence for such?  None.  Would there be any logical reason for Klein's not to have shipped the rifle to the address designated on the order form?  Of course not.  What does Martin believe happened here?  We have no idea because he lives in a contrarian fantasy world where no fact that lends itself to Oswald's guilt can be acknowledged.  An order is received and processed as reflected in Klein's business records.  Oswald receives a rifle.  The rifle found at Oswald's place of employment is the same one shipped to him by Klein's.  But that is not sufficient in the delusional contrarian world to prove that Oswald was sent the rifle.

When "Richard" can not present conclusive evidence to support his pathetic claims, he starts attacking the person he is talking to.

Klein's - a mail order business - receives an order for a rifle with a specific address.  Their records confirm that they process this order and even confirm the shipping date and method to that address.  Martin stupidly argues that this doesn't mean they shipped the rifle to that address.

What is stupid is believing that a mail order business would send out merchandise without keeping a shipping document to prove to their customer that the package was actually sent.

Would there be any logical reason for Klein's not to have shipped the rifle to the address designated on the order form?

The order was for a 36" rifle, which Klein's no longer had in stock. There's your logical reason!

Oswald receives a rifle.

Really? From whom?

The rifle found at Oswald's place of employment is the same one shipped to him by Klein's.

Really?

[John Mytton]

When "Richard" can not present conclusive evidence to support his pathetic claims, he starts attacking the person he is talking to.

Klein's - a mail order business - receives an order for a rifle with a specific address.  Their records confirm that they process this order and even confirm the shipping date and method to that address.  Martin stupidly argues that this doesn't mean they shipped the rifle to that address.

What is stupid is believing that a mail order business would send out merchandise without keeping a shipping document to prove to their customer that the package was actually sent.

Would there be any logical reason for Klein's not to have shipped the rifle to the address designated on the order form?

The order was for a 36" rifle, which Klein's no longer had in stock. There's your logical reason!

Oswald receives a rifle.

Really? From whom?

The rifle found at Oswald's place of employment is the same one shipped to him by Klein's.

Really?

What is stupid is believing that a mail order business would send out merchandise without keeping a shipping document to prove to their customer that the package was actually sent.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Beyond proving that Oswald purchased the rifle and Oswald possessing the rifle and the rifle with Oswald's prints being discovered at his work. What do you feel that whatever you're looking for would add to the preceding evidence?









JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Beyond proving that Oswald purchased the rifle and Oswald possessing the rifle and the rifle with Oswald's prints being discovered at his work. What do you feel that whatever you're looking for would add to the preceding evidence?


JohnM

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

True, but it doesn't apply here.


Beyond proving that Oswald purchased the rifle

What you can not do without making assumptions

Oswald possessing the rifle

Which you can not prove, beyond him being photographed with a rifle

the rifle with Oswald's prints being discovered at his work.

Which is not true. The FBI examined the rifle within 24 hours after the shooting and found no trace of any kind of print or even the residue that's normally left behind if a print had been lifted.

What do you feel that whatever you're looking for would add to the preceding evidence?

What "preceding evidence"?