Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Autopsy proves SBT impossible  (Read 10569 times)

Online Andrew Mason

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #90 on: April 17, 2018, 10:50:24 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There is not overwhelming, consistent evidence that Oswald killed JFK.  There's speculation and conjecture, and a little bit of weak, indirect, inconsistent, tainted, circumstantial evidence.
So you would say that Vincent Bugliosi's 52 points are weak? How is it that one can point to 52 different circumstances, all pointing to Oswald as the murderer?

Even Oswald's brother and daughter and, until recently perhaps, his wife, accept that he did the deed.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2018, 10:52:30 AM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #90 on: April 17, 2018, 10:50:24 AM »


Online Tom Sorensen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #91 on: April 17, 2018, 12:35:15 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So you would say that Vincent Bugliosi's 52 points are weak? How is it that one can point to 52 different circumstances, all pointing to Oswald as the murderer?

Long term memory loss or not on the old board before it was taken down?

That list was picked apart and destroyed several times.

Usually popped up after some LN's mountain-of-evidence got flattened.

Quote
Even Oswald's brother and daughter and, until recently perhaps, his wife, accept that he did the deed.

And you, apparently, as if that was evidence of anything.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #92 on: April 17, 2018, 03:31:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Long term memory loss or not on the old board before it was taken down?

That list was picked apart and destroyed several times.

Usually popped up after some LN's mountain-of-evidence got flattened.

And you, apparently, as if that was evidence of anything.
[/quote

 Daughter did not sat she believes he did it Though there are two daughters I believe Mom said he did not do it

Online Andrew Mason

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 170
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #93 on: April 17, 2018, 05:31:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Long term memory loss or not on the old board before it was taken down?

That list was picked apart and destroyed several times. Usually popped up after some LN's mountain-of-evidence got flattened.
The point about circumstantial evidence is that each piece by itself means little. It is the collective effect (including even weak pieces of evidence) of all these circumstances that proves the case.  The question is: is it possible that there could be an innocent person to whom all these pieces of circumstantial evidence point?  The actions of Oswald immediately after the assassination are key pieces of evidence.  The answer that most reasonable people who have examined the evidence is "no". 

You do not attack circumstantial evidence by raising doubts about individual pieces of evidence. There is just too much of it in this case to succeed in doing that. You do it by showing that the circumstantial evidence is consistent with an innocent explanation.


Quote
And you, apparently, as if that was evidence of anything.
It is not evidence of anything except that three people who had the greatest interest in convincing themselves that Oswald was innocent could not reach that conclusion from this evidence.

Online Tom Sorensen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #94 on: April 17, 2018, 07:35:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The point about circumstantial evidence is that each piece by itself means little. It is the collective effect (including even weak pieces of evidence) of all these circumstances that proves the case.  The question is: is it possible that there could be an innocent person to whom all these pieces of circumstantial evidence point?  The actions of Oswald immediately after the assassination are key pieces of evidence.  The answer that most reasonable people who have examined the evidence is "no". 

You do not attack circumstantial evidence by raising doubts about individual pieces of evidence. There is just too much of it in this case to succeed in doing that. You do it by showing that the circumstantial evidence is consistent with an innocent explanation.

It is not evidence of anything except that three people who had the greatest interest in convincing themselves that Oswald was innocent could not reach that conclusion from this evidence.

The answer that most reasonable people who have examined the evidence is "no". 

Yes, "most reasonable people" according to you and the rest of the LN crowd.

Evidence is not necessarily circumstantial because Andrew Mason says it's circumstantial.

You do not attack circumstantial evidence by raising doubts about individual pieces of evidence.

False, that's exactly how it's done and has been done for the past 50+ years.

It is not evidence of anything except...

Except you have no clue how they reached their conclusions.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2018, 07:39:41 PM by Tom Sorensen »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #94 on: April 17, 2018, 07:35:27 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #95 on: April 17, 2018, 08:41:21 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The answer that most reasonable people who have examined the evidence is "no". 

Yes, "most reasonable people" according to you and the rest of the LN crowd.

Evidence is not necessarily circumstantial because Andrew Mason says it's circumstantial.

You do not attack circumstantial evidence by raising doubts about individual pieces of evidence.

False, that's exactly how it's done and has been done for the past 50+ years.

It is not evidence of anything except...

Except you have no clue how they reached their conclusions.

June said she wanted to see more evidence. Marina changed her mind years later.
That makes 2 out of 3 for your side.

Uncle Vinnie says he could convict on 20% of Bug53
Your man would still fry, son.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #96 on: April 17, 2018, 08:58:45 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
  The question is: is it possible that there could be an innocent person to whom all these pieces of circumstantial evidence point?  The actions of Oswald immediately after the assassination are key pieces of evidence.

 A conspiracy's purpose would of course be aimed to create evidence to frame an individual, so a simple preponderance is not sufficient What do you think Oswald did immediately after?

Online Tom Sorensen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #97 on: April 17, 2018, 09:46:55 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
June said she wanted to see more evidence. Marina changed her mind years later.
That makes 2 out of 3 for your side.

Slowly improving...

Quote
Uncle Vinnie says he could convict on 20% of Bug53
Your man would still fry, son.

Wait, what trial was that?

Uncle Vinnie running his mouth just like you are.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #97 on: April 17, 2018, 09:46:55 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #98 on: April 17, 2018, 11:17:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A conspiracy's purpose would of course be aimed to create evidence to frame an individual, so a simple preponderance is not sufficient What do you think Oswald did immediately after?

Thanked his lucky stars when he wasn't held at the TSBD.
Made sure he wasn't caught at home.
Panicked and shot Tippit, the poor dumb cop.
Panicked at the TT

That's it. It's all over now.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2054
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #99 on: April 17, 2018, 11:56:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So you would say that Vincent Bugliosi's 52 points are weak? How is it that one can point to 52 different circumstances, all pointing to Oswald as the murderer?

One cannot.  Most of the "53" aren't evidence at all.  He left his wedding ring in a cup.  He preferred Dr Pepper to Coke.  He wasn't chatty with the cab driver.  He didn't read the newspaper in the domino room that day.

Quote
Even Oswald's brother and daughter and, until recently perhaps, his wife, accept that he did the deed.

Is that supposedly evidence too?  Which daughter, though?  I wasn't aware that either one of them accepted this.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #99 on: April 17, 2018, 11:56:13 PM »