Was Oswald denied Counsel by the Dallas Authorities ?

[John Iacoletti]

How about starting a thread on whether Oswald was wearing boxers or briefs on the day he assassinated JFK?  I'm sure that qualifies as an historical fact.

If he did, you would probably consider that to be part of your "mountain of evidence" and that this somehow demonstrated an intention to commit murder.  Because that's what you do.

[Mike Orr]

Texas has no Statute of limitations for murder or manslaughter charges .

[Richard Smith]

Look up the term "statute of limitations". Most crimes have one, but murder does NOT. This is an OPEN case. Case closed. 🤣

Ugh.  Is the Lincoln assassination an open case?  You are confusing concepts.  Although there is no statute of limitations on murder, the JFK case is not "open" because the Texas authorities are satisfied that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person responsible for that crime.  When the person responsible for a crime is known to the authorities and deceased (i.e. not subject to prosecution) the matter is considered closed.  It is solved from the perspective of the authorities.  What would be the point in continuing to investigate the matter if the authorities are satisfied that the party responsible for the crime is known?  But don't take my word for it.  Contact the DPD and ask them if the JFK assassination is an open case that they are actively investigating.  Let us know who is still working on this case.  He must be a lonely person not unlike yourself.  Maybe you could become pen pals.  But you have taken us down the rabbit hole again with your endless nonsense.  Even if the matter were technically considered open and we all agreed that Oswald was denied legal counsel, you haven't shown why it matters in 2018 over 50 years after Oswald's death.  The relevance of Oswald's legal rights as they would pertain in a criminal trial expired with him on Nov. 24, 1963 when it became clear there would never be such a trial.  They have no relevance outside that context in regard to his guilt or innocence in the JFK assassination fifty years later.  And you have shown none.  What you are attempting to do is portray Oswald as a sympathetic victim of police injustice.  THEY were out to get him.  LOL.  It's a way to avoid addressing the actual evidence that links Oswald to this crime with absolute certainty.

[Richard Smith]

The Lincoln case had a trial. People were found guilty. How clueless are you? Or, is it that you employ lies to hide the truth?

If a brave police force and DA wanted to charge someone for JFK's murder and they have the evidence they could since this is an OPEN case. Are you calling Hoover a liar since he said the case would be open for all of time.

Whew.  There was no trial for John Wilkes Booth.  He was the person who assassinated Lincoln.  Like Oswald he died before he could be tried and convicted.  So is that an open case or not under your misguided application of the statute of limitations?  It is exactly the same scenario as Oswald.  Here is a hint:  The case is closed because the authorities are satisfied Booth was the responsible party (just like Oswald).  They are not actively investigating the Lincoln assassination for that reason.  There would be no point.  The same holds true for the JFK assassination.  It is a closed matter from the perspective of the authorities who have the responsibility to prosecute that matter.   They arrested and charged Oswald for that crime.  They are satisfied that he was the assassin.  He is dead.   The matter is closed from a legal perspective.  Again, if you are claiming otherwise contact the DPD and ask them who is actively working on the JFK investigation. 

[Leonard Wright]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/26/j-edgar-hoover-called-oswald-killing-inexcusable.html

J. E. Hoover:

"[Oswald's death] will allow, I am afraid, a lot of civil rights people to raise a lot of hell because he was handcuffed and had no weapon," Hoover said. "There are bound to be some elements of our society who will holler their heads off that his civil rights were violated -- which they were."

Hoover said that the FBI had warned the Dallas police of threats to Oswald's life and that the city's police chief, Jesse Curry, had assured the bureau that Oswald would be properly protected.

"However," Hoover's memo reads, "this was not done."

-There is a document from Hoover that references the fact that Oswald's rights may have been violated based on the failure to protect him while in police custody. I'll try to find this memo.

[Leonard Wright]

J.E. Hoover (Report dated 11/24/1963 - 4:00 pm - "From" and "To" not indicated)

"Oswald had been saying he wanted John Abt as his lawyer and Abt, with only that kind   of evidence, could have turned the case around, I'm afraid. All the talking down there might have required a change of venue on the basis that Oswald could not have gotten a fair trial in Dallas...."

Source:

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32263509.pdf

[John Iacoletti]

It's a way to avoid addressing the actual evidence that links Oswald to this crime with absolute certainty.

You can't avoid something that doesn't actually exist.