Bugliosi's "Conclusion of No Conspiracy"

[Bill Chapman]

Exactly.  Bugliosi's only tool is lawyer rhetoric, so that's what he goes with.

He has said that he wrote the book as if he were at argument in court. Something like that.
Show us one lawyer who doesn't exaggerate.

Or even one CTer...

[John Mytton]

27. If a group like the mob or the CIA was behind Oswald?s assassination of Kennedy, in the period of time leading up to the assassination they (his ?handlers,? per conspiracy lore) would obviously have to be in touch with him. But in a telephone conversation, Mrs. Puckett told me that none of the seventeen tenants of the rooming house in 1963 had their own phone. She said they all shared ?one communal pay phone on the wall in the hall back near the kitchen, and with all of them having only this one phone, it was in use a lot.?67       

Also, Oswald spent every weekend, except one, with his wife and children at the Paine residence in Irving, and missed no days of work at the Book Depository Building. In the evenings we know he went to the nearby washateria on occasion, and went out on the evenings of October 23, a Wednesday, when he attended a speech by General Walker, and October 25, a Friday night when he was in Irving and attended a meeting of the American Civil Liberties Union. But other than this, according to Mrs. Puckett?s mother (Mrs. Johnson) and the housekeeper, Earlene Roberts, in the five weeks prior to the assassination Oswald simply never went out. Mrs. Johnson said that except for watching TV with the other renters sometimes (during which, she said, if they talked to him, he wouldn?t answer), ?I just really never did see that man leave [his] room?95 percent of the time he would sit in his room.?68 Earlene Roberts said, ?He was always home at night?he never went out.?69 And Ruth Paine testified at the trial in London that Oswald was a loner who never had a relationship with anyone other than Marina, and never received or made any calls at her house phone while he was in her home. When I asked her, ?So you?re not aware of any contacts he had with anyone?? she answered, ?No.?70        So it would seem that the biggest murder plot in American history, with the inevitable follow-up conversations, could only have taken place under the following circumstances: Oswald called his mob or CIA contacts from his job at the Book Depository Building, or they called and asked for him. But Roy Truly, the superintendent at the Book Depository, testified before the Warren Commission that there was only one phone (on the first floor) for the employees to use during their lunch hour ?for a minute? and they were ?supposed to ask permission to use the phone.? And Truly said, ?I never remember ever seeing him [Oswald] on the telephone? during work hours.71 Or on the way home from work Oswald got off the bus to call his co-conspirators from a pay phone. Or they called him at the rooming house (Earlene Roberts, the housekeeper, said that Oswald never received any telephone calls),72 or he called them with a bunch of change from the busy communal pay phone on the wall in the hall back near the kitchen of the rooming house.73 Just how likely is any of this?       

Moreover, Arthur Johnson, the landlord at Oswald?s rooming house, told Dallas Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth on the afternoon of the assassination that Oswald ?always talked in that foreign language when he talked on the phone.? Whom was he talking to? Roberts, the housekeeper, told Aynesworth that Oswald ?dialed that BL number [Irving, Texas, where Marina was living] a lot.?74 As far as receiving phone calls, the landlady, Mrs. Johnson, like Earlene Roberts, said she didn?t recall Oswald ever receiving a call at the rooming house.7
RHVB



JohnM

[John Mytton]

28. Part of a criminal?s invariable preparation for any premeditated crime is to contemplate how to pull it off without being caught. Although Oswald may have been disoriented enough not to have considered this part of the venture, we can be more than 100 percent certain that a group like the CIA, mob, or military-industrial complex would have. Since we know this to be true, if a group was behind Oswald?s act, it is absolutely inconceivable that it wouldn?t have done everything possible to avoid having its hit man captured and interrogated by the authorities, which carried the enormous danger of his cracking and implicating the group. No matter how far removed the group personally may have been from his act, he would have to have sufficient knowledge to incriminate whoever approached him to do the job, that person could in turn put the hat on the person or persons above him, and so on up to the architects of the assassination themselves. Since they would know this, at a very minimum they would have tried to provide for Oswald?s escape. But much more probably, a car would have been waiting for him at a prearranged place after he left the Depository Building, not to help him escape, but to drive him to his death.* Yet here we have Oswald, right after the assassination, leaving the Depository Building, completely alone and wandering out on the streets, trying to get back to his home by catching a bus, then deciding to get off and find a cab. This fact alone, and all by itself, tells any sensible person that Oswald acted alone, that there was no conspiracy in the assassination to kill Kennedy.       

And as indicated, when Oswald was arrested he only had $13.87 on his person,76 not enough to get him far away from Dallas, which, in the unlikely event the mob or CIA didn?t arrange for his immediate death, they would have wanted him to be.       

Even if we make the completely unreasonable assumption that a group behind Oswald?s killing Kennedy would not have made every effort to help Oswald escape or kill him after he left the Book Depository Building to ensure he wasn?t captured and interrogated (i.e., apparently the group wanted him to be grilled for hours on end before it killed him), and accept the assumption made by so very many that it decided, instead, to have Ruby silence Oswald for it, let?s see where that takes us. There are two realities to consider. First, by the time Ruby shot Oswald, Oswald had already been interrogated for twelve hours over a three-day period (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday) by investigators from the Dallas Police Department, FBI, and Secret Service, as well as by the U.S. Post Office inspector and U.S. marshall in Dallas.77 Second, if it was the group?s plan to get someone to silence Oswald after Oswald killed Kennedy, all rational minds have to agree that the group surely would not have waited until after Oswald killed Kennedy before it started looking for someone to silence Oswald. This would all be worked out, of course, well in advance.       

In view of these two realities, the evidence that Ruby did not silence Oswald for any group such as the mob is that if he had been chosen to kill Oswald, he would have done so the first opportunity he had, rather than give the authorities two more days to interrogate Oswald, and that was on Friday evening at the Dallas Police Department. That evening, while Oswald was being grilled in the Homicide and Robbery office by Captain Fritz and others, Ruby, we know, was right outside Fritz?s office talking to reporters. At one point, Fritz brought Oswald out of the office and Oswald walked right past Ruby, coming within two to three feet of him.78 And Ruby admitted to the FBI that he had his revolver, the one he used to kill Oswald two days later, in his right front trouser pocket because he had a lot of money from his nightclub on his person.79 Ruby?s own attorney, Tom Howard, said Ruby was armed with his revolver that Friday night.80* Presumably at the request of his lawyers, Ruby wrote his version of the events that led up to his shooting of Oswald on 3 ? 5 inch cards, and the cards were given to his lawyers. Some were prepared before his trial, others in advance of a motion for a new trial. On one of the cards, he wrote in his handwriting, ?Had I wanted to get him [Oswald] I could have reached in and shot [him] when either Fritz [or] Curry brought him out in the hall, when they told the press that they would bring him down in the basement.?81       

In addition to the fact that if Ruby killed Oswald for the mob (or any other group) he would have done so on Friday night to prevent further interrogation of Oswald, there is another reason why Ruby would have killed Oswald Friday night. The mob and Ruby would necessarily have to believe that Oswald would be extremely well protected by Dallas law enforcement, so Ruby would have no choice but to kill him the first opportunity he had since he would have had no way of knowing that he would ever have another opportunity to do so.       

The fact that Ruby did not kill Oswald on Friday night, when it would have been so easy for him to have done so, is virtually conclusive evidence, all by itself, that he didn?t kill Oswald on Sunday for anyone but himself, which in turn is just further evidence that there was nothing inside of Oswald to silence because he too acted alone.
RHVB



JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Fallacious Bugliosi Argument #22

Not only is this just a rephrasing of #21 (Bugliosi does that a lot in order to make lists that look long), but it does nothing to argue against the possibility of a conspiracy, which is what he is trying to do here.

[John Iacoletti]

He has said that he wrote the book as if he were at argument in court. Something like that.
Show us one lawyer who doesn't exaggerate.

This is why lawyers shouldn't pretend to be scientists -- or that they care about the truth.

[John Iacoletti]

If you don't think Oswald was involved then you can ignore his responses which, again, are directed at those who DO believe he was.

Bugliosi's arguments are fallacious no matter what you believe about Oswald.

It's the usual strawman argument that any conspiracy would necessarily be vast, and have perfectly executed a plan that micromanaged every little detail of what ended up happening.

[Bill Chapman]

Unfortunately we CTs can't prove Oswald didn't do it, as it is exceedingly difficult to prove a negative. However you, Feluccas are in a worse  boat as you can't prove he did it either, despite you having to prove a positive.

No one can prove anything to a CTroll