Tim I get what you are saying For instance, the handwriting expert's conclusion that it was Oswald's writing on the order form for Klein's should count for something.
It doesn't count for much. First of all handwriting "analysis" is unscientific and subjective.
http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3835&context=penn_law_reviewSecondly, this identification was done based on two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon. That's unreliable even by handwriting "analysis" standards (such as they are/were).
Thirdly, even if this identification was perfectly accurate (and not just wishful thinking), all that would tell you is that Oswald filled out an order blank, not that he killed the president.
Part of the problem is all of the seeming dishonesty of the investigation, for some of us, has created an environment where suspicion effects virtually everything John L has called into question when and where the handwriting analysis came from But if we put that aside for the moment and just say there was a properly executed handwriting analysis that determined it was LHO's handwriting then yes that counts as a piece of evidence I do think people on both sides go to far in saying there is absolutely zero evidence of something one way or another
Sure, it's evidence, but evidence of what exactly? The amount written on the coupon doesn't match the amount of the alleged money order, Klein's didn't even make a copy of the payment for this order coupon, nor was there anything to tie that particular coupon or that particular money order with that particular rifle. Nor is there any evidence that a package from Klein's was ever shipped through the postal service to PO box 2915, or picked up or signed for by Oswald or anybody else.
That being said I am having a lot of trouble finding clean facts that support the LN
That's because it's all speculation, assumptions, and handwaving.
P.S. it's John I, with a capital i, not L