They were confused, as was everyone else who witnessed the traumatic assassination in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
And you're confused, too. You just don't realize it.
My state of mind has nothing to do with assassination research and nothing to do with where people were looking in testimony and on film. Stop your fascination with me and discuss the subject at hand shall we?
let's have an hypothetical shall we?
Imagine there has been a murder on an high street and 100 people were watching. All 100 people in testimony stated that John Doe walked right up to Jane Doe and shot her in the head then ran south. Then a man turns up with a video tape and on the tape is footage of not John Doe shooting Jane Doe but instead it shows Jane Doe shooting herself and then John Doe runs south.
The man who turned up with the film has no idea of the chain of custody, he doesn't know who had it before him or if it had been tampered with.
The case goes to the high court and the jury is left in a difficult situation. 100 people of sound mind stipulate John Doe shot Jane Doe but the tape shows otherwise. Does the jury question the chain of custody of the tape, regard it as inadmissible and believe 100 people OR does the jury call 100 people liars and go with the tape?
What would you do Tom as a jury member?