Non problematic evidence?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Non problematic evidence?  (Read 76533 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #49 on: March 28, 2019, 12:24:21 AM »
The shell casings and fragments (if genuine) might implicate a particular rifle, but not a shooter.

Fragments cannot be traced to a particular rifle....PERIOD!!!

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #50 on: March 28, 2019, 11:49:33 AM »
Can anybody name one piece of physical evidence conclusively tied to Oswald which is of such significance that it beyond reasonable doubt clearly points to his guilt?

Can anybody name one piece of credible evidence conclusively tied to the assassination which is of such significance that it beyond reasonable doubt clearly points to a conspiracy?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #51 on: March 28, 2019, 04:00:28 PM »
Can anybody name one piece of credible evidence conclusively tied to the assassination which is of such significance that it beyond reasonable doubt clearly points to a conspiracy?

I can't.

Now can you answer Martin's question?

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #52 on: March 28, 2019, 04:26:22 PM »
I can't.

Now can you answer Martin's question?

I answered it with a question. I agree with Tim Nickerson regarding the combination of evidence. The preponderance of the evidence points to LHO. That is what convinced me.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #53 on: March 28, 2019, 09:58:20 PM »
I answered it with a question. I agree with Tim Nickerson regarding the combination of evidence. The preponderance of the evidence points to LHO. That is what convinced me.

In other words; just pile up as much as you like, don't question it or examine it closely, call it evidence and conclude that the preponderance of evidence points to LHO.....

It doesn't matter if a conspiracy can be proven or not. Even if it can't be proven, it still does not allow the conclusion that Oswald did it (alone), so your question has very little to do with my question. Care to try again?

« Last Edit: March 28, 2019, 10:01:26 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #54 on: March 28, 2019, 10:08:32 PM »
Charles is just another in a long line of True Believers who pops up, insists that Oswald did it, claims overwhelming evidence, refuses to specify what that evidence is or examine any evidence at all, and then insists that if you can't prove a conspiracy then Oswald did it.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #55 on: March 28, 2019, 10:17:34 PM »
Can anybody name one piece of credible evidence conclusively tied to the assassination which is of such significance that it beyond reasonable doubt clearly points to a conspiracy?

I'm sure that I could call out at least six pieces of evidence that points to a conspiracy....But at the same time I'm sure that you couldn't see them....