JFK Assassination Forum

If the DPD thought the car had any relevance, why did they release it?

I have a bias toward the truth, which means I let the evidence tell me what happened. That approach requires one to be able to weigh evidence for probative value, because in some instances, the evidence is conflicting. For example, we have a large group of earwitnesses who thought the shots all came from the GK and another large group that thought all the shots came from the TSBD. Unless one wants to accept the ridiculous proposition that the GK earwitnesses couldn't hear the TSBD shots and the TSBD earwitnesses couldn't hear the GK shots, the only conclusion is that one of those groups has to be wrong. It is theoretically possible they could both be wrong, but it is not possible both could be right. So how should we determine which group got it right. It's very simple. You let other forms of evidence tell us which group got it right. We have eyewitnesses who SAW a gunman firing from the TSBD and pointed out the window they saw him at. There were no eyewitnesses to a GK gunman. Spent shells were found by the window the eyewitnesses pointed out and a rifle was found elsewhere on the sixth floor that was positively matched to both the spent shells found by the window and the only two recovered bullets. This additional evidence makes it a very easy call as to where the shots came from.

I have been on both sides of the conspiracy question at different times in my life. I would be more than happy to admit there was a conspiracy to kill JFK if somebody could provide any compelling evidence of such. I have challenged CTs for over 3 decades to provide me with credible evidence that someone other than Oswald was complicit in the crime. I have begged them for such evidence. Every time I do, I get a dial tone. After six decades it's safe to say there is no such evidence. It would be totally unrealistic to expect new evidence to show up now given that an army of researchers has looked in vain for such evidence for six decades.

The time to be open minded about the possibility Oswald could be innocent expired a long time ago. There is zero doubt he fired the shots that killed JFK. Anyone who can't accept that is only fooling themselves. If that means I have a confirmation bias, so be it. There is a theoretical possibility that Oswald fired the shots but had accomplices for which no evidence has ever surfaced. The likelihood of that being the case comes down to how many zeros there should be to the right of the decimal point. If I were the oddsmaker on that question, I would say that there is about a .001% chance that is the case. If that makes me closed minded, I am very comfortable with that. I know who killed JFK and it baffles me how so many people can't figure it out.

   The DPD did immobilize what I believe was an intended "getaway" car. After doing that, a DPD Officer with a shotgun was standing guard over it. This in the face of your claiming, "...neither the DPD nor the FBI thought that car had ANY Relevance"? You continue exposing how extremely little JFK Assassination Research you actually do. Stop "blowing off" and actually do some research.

No, a strawman argument is not right. You definitely favor the earwitnesses.

You argue against two shots making you a three shot proponent.

The eyewitnesses are predominantly two shots, basically the first shot struck JFK, the second shot was then headshot with some stating a shot after the headshot.

   

The three shot witnesses were predominantly earwitnesses. There is not a single piece of physical evidence; bullets, shells, medical, trajectory, indicating there were three shots.

That just leaves earwitnesses as the source of your storyline. If the earwitnesses had stated there were four shots then you would be scouring the Zapruder Film for a fourth shot. Maybe another child running on the sidewalk.