JFK Assassination Forum

Oswald had agency, made his decisions (however limited they were) on his own, they weren't forced on him. He had two brothers who also grew up in the same (roughly) environment. They turned out not only to not be bad men they turned out to be good ones.

He disgraces himself in the Marines (among other things twice court-martialed), he defects to the Soviet Union and tells his family to get lost but then asks for help when he needs them. He brutally beats Marina. He prevents her from learning English so that she's dependent on him. He tries to kill Walker and in doing so would abandon his family on their own. He then tries to defect to Cuba and again is abandoning his family including a seven months pregnant Marina (he told Marina to find her way to Cuba on her own). Instead of providing for him family he thinks he's some type of historic figure. Then of course he kills JFK. And a police officer. Both men with families and small children.

That's just a partial list. He was a bad man who made decisions on his own. He had free will.

Excellent, excellent points, Steve.

It's impossible to really say. OJ was tried for both murders, but they were at the same scene at the same time. I would think that in Oswald's case if he were tried for JFK first the judge would allow evidence up to and including his visit to the room on Beckley and getting his revolver, as well as his arrest in the theater. Overlapping the two cases would be highly prejudicial to Oswald in the JFK case unless he had been convicted of the Tippit murder. I believe a judge would be extremely careful about not allowing that to happen. The most straightforward way would be to try him for Tippit first. AI agrees with me, which i'm not sure I should find comforting: "Under Texas criminal procedure, a defendant must be tried separately for each distinct, unrelated offense unless the charges stem from the exact same criminal act (e.g., a single bomb that kills two people). Because the Tippit shooting and the Kennedy assassination were two separate events involving different victims at different locations, they would have required two distinct trials."

If it's impossible to say, why would you think Oswald would have been tried separately for each murder. I can think of lot's of cases where someone charged with multiple homicides had them tried in a single trial. I can't think of one in which they were tried separately except in cases where the crimes were committed in different jurisdictions.

Like it or not, the criminal justice system exists to protect the accused. The deck is heavily stacked in favor of the accused in almost every way. In the hands of a really skillful criminal defense team, Oswald's trial likely would have looked far different from how most LNers picture it looking - and the outcome, IMO, would have been far less certain.

Yes that is true. Our criminal justice system has a duel purpose. Find the truth while protecting the rights of the accused and sometimes those two are at cross purposes. History doesn't have that problem. It's sole purpose is to find the truth. We do not have to be concerned with Oswald's rights because he no longer has any. He cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property because he has none of those either. That's why it always amuses me when CTs claim a particular piece of evidence would be inadmissible in court. Who freaking cares if it would have been inadmissible? If it helps tell us who killed JFK, that should be our only concern.

Yes this is probably what a reasonably intelligent person who is not under the influence of drugs,and/  or MK ultra hypnosis, would do if he wanted an untraceable rifle.

Why do you assume Oswald wanted an untraceable rifle?

So Oswald using a fake alias name he had used in the USSR and listing that name as an alternate for his own real name P.O. Box and mail ordering a rifle using that fake name and listing that P.O. Box as the address to  send the rifle…was because …

A.He was naturally as Stupid as a box of rocks
B.He was aware of how stupid he was acting but he did not care because he was having marriage problems with Marina even before he became fixated on Walker. It was Oswald’s attempt to shock Marina into paying attention to him.
C. He was mentally disturbed from all the way back to his childhood and so it’s not unexpected that he could be this stupid.
D. He was a schizophrenic and Alek Hidell was his other personality.

There, I think that about covers the LN possible reasons for what appears to be incredibly stupid decisions made by Oswald.

Now any CTs still on this forum, please feel free to criticize those above listed reasons and list some alternative possibilities that are more plausible.

You haven't even begun to scratch the surface for possible reasons Oswald used an alias to order the rifle. It might be a reason neither you nor I have even thought of. Oswald's mind was a lock box which nobody has the key for. It we knew Oswald's reasons for what he did, it might make perfect sense to us or it might make no sense at all. That's why I think it is a futile exercise trying to figure out why Oswald did anything. My focus is on what I know he did. That's a fairly straight forward exercise. I never will understand why some people think it is necessary to figure out why Oswald did something in order to know that he did something.

EUREKA!  This cop was the one who probably saw where the bullet that struck the manhole cover had buried into the grass and was going there to pick up that bullet lest it be discovered and found be a 7.65 bullet.

He was carrying the black flashlight ready to be used as a signaling device to signal the 2nd gunmans hit so he wouldn’t fire again and to recover any missed shot by this gunman because this gunman was using a different caliber bullet than the TSBD conspirator shooter trying to use the MC rifle that had been mail ordered to set up Oswald or had been stolen from Oswald.