Preach it, Lance !    Thank you wherever thou art.

There was a special edition of Geraldo LIVE about the OJ trial over several nights in the 90s.
 - one night he had Bugs  - another night it was Spence

I saw the airing of the trial and I never subscribed to Showtime so it had to be on another venue that I saw it. At the conclusion, Geraldo interviewed Bugliosi and Spence TOGRTHER and it was about the mock trial, not about OJ. I don't know why you think the airing of the triall would have been limited to Showtime. It's not as if they have exclusive rights to the programs they air.

Showtime did carry the first US airing of a condensed version of the trial in 1986. Two years later, Geraldo hosted a rebroadcast of the program although I've been unable to find a source for which cable channel or network carried it. This is what I found through AI:

Geraldo Rivera’s 1988 Hosting of On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald
Geraldo Rivera hosted the two‑part 1988 TV event On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald, a dramatized “docu‑trial” featuring real witnesses, lawyers Vincent Bugliosi and Gerry Spence, and filmed in the Henry King Courtroom in Dallas

What the program was
On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald was a made‑for‑television “docu‑trial” produced by Tribune Entertainment. It was not a real courtroom proceeding — Oswald had been executed in 1963 — but a staged re‑enactment in which surviving witnesses to the JFK assassination and the murder of police officer J.D. Tippit were recalled to testify
 
The event was designed to dramatize the legal arguments of the prosecution (Vincent Bugliosi) and defense (Gerry Spence)

Rivera’s role
Geraldo Rivera served as the on‑stage host and moderator for the 1988 broadcast. Press photos from the event show him standing in the Henry King Courtroom in Dallas, Texas, where the trial would have taken place had Oswald lived
 
Rivera’s role was to introduce witnesses, manage the proceedings, and provide commentary, similar to a live news‑style host.

Production details
Original air dates: November 22 and 23, 1988

Format: Two‑part TV event, filmed in England but staged to resemble a U.S. courtroom

Participants: Real witnesses, Vincent Bugliosi, Gerry Spence, and archival footage of Oswald and other figures

Setting: Henry King Courtroom, Dallas, Texas, as a symbolic backdrop

Here is a trailer from when Geraldo took his turn hosting the trial. This was aired by WGN.

https://www.retrojunk.com/c/wwLU5Eemy7/on-trial-lee-harvey-oswald-special-on-wgntv

My recollection is that the jury in the mock trial that saw all 27 hours of testimony voted to convict Oswald as the lone assassin.

I think the call-in verdict reached after viewers only saw 4 hours of the trial, was that Oswald was guilty but part of a conspiracy.

The Left wants the building to be named after one sexual miscreant instead of two.

No, he does not. By the time Bowers talked with Mark Lane, he was afraid to say anything that would expressly place a gunman on the grassy knoll. Were both of his friends who spoke on the record lying when they disclosed that Bowers did not tell the WC everything he saw? Was Bowers' wife lying when she said her husband was warned not to talk?

And you guys do nothing but present labored, dubious denials when it comes to the clear implication of Bowers' testimony about the three cars that did an obvious recon of the area behind the knoll in the 20-30 minutes leading up to the assassination. The cars clearly weren't looking for a parking space. Bowers himself noted that the cars appeared to be "probing" the area, and that the second car's driver appeared to be talking into a microphone. But, oh, nah, according to you, this was just some strange, cosmic coincidence that just "must" have an innocent explanation, even though you can't provide one that makes any sense.

As for the number of shots that Bowers said he heard, it is rather lame to cite this as some kind of concrete proof that only three shots were fired. Some witnesses said they heard four or more shots. A number of witnesses said they only heard two shots. A few witnesses said they only heard one shot. The scientific acoustical evidence proves that at least four shots were fired, and the Zapruder film shows six reactions to gunfire.

And I notice you said nothing about Bowers' statement that two of the shots came in very rapid succession, too quickly to have been fired by the same person if using a bolt-action rifle. In fact, a number of witnesses said the thing, that two of the shots came right on top of each other, as "bang, bang," with virtually no break in between. But, yeah, never mind that, right?

You are correct. I was thinking of Charles Brehm.

Bowers said he didn't see anyone behind the fence at the time of the shooting. Period. He testified that the two people he did see were standing IN FRONT of the fence towards the mouth of the underpass. Not behind it. You cannot stand behind the fence and be near the mouth of the underpass. And he said the shots he heard came from either the TSBD or the underpass. Nowhere else. None from behind the fence. He alone completely demolishes all of your conspiracy beliefs.

Here is his testimony on the men he saw:

Mr. BOWERS - Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about midtwenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket.

Later:
Mr. BOWERS - At the time of the shooting there seemed to be some commotion, and immediately following there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline.
Mr. BALL - On his motorcycle?
Mr. BOWERS - Yes.
Mr. BOWERS - He came up into this area where there are some trees, and where I had described the two men were in the general vicinity of this.
Mr. BALL - Were the two men there at the time?
Mr. BOWERS - I--as far as I know, one of them was. The other I could not say. The darker dressed man was too hard to distinguish from the trees. The white shirt, yes; I think he was.

So the motorcycle officer (Haygood) went up to where the two men were standing (he was wrong about this; Haygood got off his motorcycle). That was in FRONT of the fence NOT behind it. And again he heard no shot from behind the fence. He testified that he thought the three shots - three not four or five but three - all came from either the TSBD or the underpass.

Again: Bowers said he never saw anyone BEHIND the fence. Could he be wrong? Of course, witnesses often are. But that's not the question here.

The two men he saw - the older man and the man in the plaid shirt/jacket - can be seen in the Moorman photo on the steps. Why he didn't see the black man/couple is a good question.

You've already proved you have no credible answer for the evidence that puts Oswald on the first and second floors of the TSBD shortly before, during, and within 40 seconds after the assassination. This is why Roy Truly did not see Oswald when Truly crossed the second-floor landing and headed up the stairs to the third floor no more than 85 seconds after the shooting, even though he was running 5-10 seconds ahead of Officer Baker. Oswald was already in the second-floor lunchroom when Baker saw him because he had just come there from the first floor to get a soda.

There is no credible evidence that Oswald was seen on either the first or second floor within 40 seconds of the assassination. He was spotted by Baker entering the second floor lunchroom shortly after the assassination. Truly did not see him because Oswald had already gone through the doorway into the lunchroom but Baker spotted him through the glass of the outer door. Maybe that was Baker's training as a cop to be alert to his surroundings or maybe he just happened to glance to his right and saw Oswald walking away from him. Either way, that does not establish Oswald's presence on the second floor "within 40 seconds after the assassination". We don't know how long after the last shot was fired that Baker spotted Oswald entering the lunchroom because nobody was timing either man that day. It can only be estimated through recreations how long after the shooting that Baker spotted Oswald. Both men's movements were timed twice during the recreations, and the shorter and longer time for Oswald's movements were shorter than the shorter and longer time of Baker's movements. Nothing in the recreations provides Oswald with an alibi because they do not preclude Oswald having fired the rifle and then reaching the lunchroom just ahead of Baker and Truly.