Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.

I know well the problem of inaccuracy with Ai, but Grok has a good record from my experience. Not perfect mind you. But the following is worth considering

https://x.com/i/grok/share/f4b0c295a9a446d880d81dd59cb3e15e
72
When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.

There is no way that any of the evidence recovered from the limo would be ruled inadmissible. The limo was in the White House garage. It was secure. Read up on Case law.
73
At the time of his post May 24, 1964 testimony, he was assuming that they were bullet holes. And rightly so. The questions that he was being asked in the testimony about trajectory alignment seemed rather pointless after he pointed out to Specter that he hadn't made a very thorough study of the Zapruder film.

JBC had a hole in his back and another in his chest. His clothes had holes in the same location. Who in their right mind would argue that the holes in his body and the holes in his clothes were not caused by the same bullet?
74
Conspiracy theory is not a negative term. Conspiracies do exist and sometimes they are part of high-profile crimes. Watergate was a conspiracy. So was Iran-contra gate. The Lincoln assassination was a conspiracy even though the shooting was carried out by one man.
9/11 was obviously a conspiracy.

Some crimes are conspiracies while others are the work of one individual. The important thing is to determine if there is credible evidence that a particular crime was carried out by more than one individual. In the case of the JFKA, no such credible evidence exists. It all points to Oswald alone. For the most part JFK-CTs try to make their case with excuses to dismiss all the damning evidence against Oswald, not by providing concrete evidence that others were involved. They figure out a long time ago that the latter was a dead-end street. Now, it's all about coming up with excuses to dismiss all the evidence of Oswald's guilt.
75
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 09:03:24 PM »
A guess implies the absence of a memory. But people recalling a distinct tempo of the shots were not guessing.


 BS: Everybody was guessing. Some just guessed better than others.
76
You're welcome. The wannabe Oswald legal defense team will object to those two fragments from being admitted into court as evidence.

When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.
77
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Zeon Mason on Yesterday at 08:04:43 PM »
A guess implies the absence of a memory. But people recalling a distinct tempo of the shots were not guessing. Here is Harold Norman relating the tempo of the shots (at the 0:24 sec mark)

His recreation is 5 seconds. If it had been 10 seconds, it would be noticeably slower. You don’t think Norman would have known the difference?

Norman also recalled that when he heard the 1st shot it was when JFKs right hand was up to his head
As though he was brushing his Hair. That’s remarkably coincidental with JFK at the Z190 frame.

The reason I have not dismissed a Z190 1st shot is because it seems about how long it would take for the shooter to have leaned over , position the rifle on the boxes, adjust rifle to align his scope reticle and start adjusting as for the moving JFK. If the shooter had arranged those boxes to use as a rifle rest , then he most likely had envisioned the 1st  vertical angle that he would  attempt  the 1st shot just as he envisioned the horizontal plane angle by how he positioned the boxes at the angle they were relative to the window ledge.

The Z190 1st shot fits well enough with the 1….2..3 pattern and it’s closer  to Norman’s 5 sec sequence.

As far as the tree foliage , it could be that the shooter was able to have positioned his rifle as early  as Z140-Z170 but he took longer than he had anticipated for tracking JFK in using the scope sight picture.  Because of that more narrowly focused area , the shooters peripheral vision was lessened such that perhaps  tree foliage appeared in his sight picture suddenly just AS he squeezed the trigger.

There is still the Tague problem however. It doesn’t seem to be plausible that a  Z313 fragment could fly over the windshield and drop down if it had enough velocity to haves chipped the curb. Maybe a lead fragment traveling at 200 ft/ sec  can chip off  a small particle of concrete from the curb?   IDK.

78
So the SS agents that searched the limo 1st for some reason missed finding a whole intact bullet. Then 2 Navy Vets were sent to search the limo and Lo and Behold there’s some sort of bullet ( ball nosed or conical? What caliber?) in plain sight which was “recoved” and labeled as “missile”.

It’s that damn Mandela effect, I’m telling ya. It’s altering time in the quantum physics world due to the CERN particle accelerator experiment that discovered the “God” particle.  ???
79


So you are saying the sign-in at the airport lounge and arrest record alias were just wild coincidences and that accusation just arose out of nowhere?...
80
Well then, it should be easy to find clarification in the official documents for such a major discrepancy.
Missile is a bullet, I'm not aware of any reference of other fragments found in this case called "missiles".
Even if "removed" Humes made no further reference to it, The document was hidden until 1972.

Find an official reference that missile means fragment would clarify it as not just another lame excuse

Since you are just going to repeat yourself, I'll respond with what I said the last time:

The "major discrepancy" exists only in your own head and nowhere else. "Missile" has a range of meanings, and the fragments exchanged for the receipt falls within that. For that matter, Sibert and O'Neil both talk about the fragments and the receipt exchanged therefore in their ARRB depositions.

Sibert and O'Neill also talked to the HSCA about the receipt. As in their HSCA depositions, they said the receipt was exchanged for fragments, not a bullet. Griffith and Corbett have already found this, but you are far, far behind everyone else.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10