Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?  (Read 31104 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4878
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #260 on: September 12, 2018, 12:06:55 AM »
Where have you been? That has been the excuse for LNers for a long time. You are still having trouble showing that those two turns were necessary, aren't you?

Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8396
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #261 on: September 12, 2018, 12:09:04 AM »
Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...

How about any whatsoever?

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #262 on: September 12, 2018, 12:59:27 AM »
Where have you been? That has been the excuse for LNers for a long time. You are still having trouble showing that those two turns were necessary, aren't you?
Where have we been? Well, we've been here all along! Waiting, (with baited breath, even!) for you to reveal how "the turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?"  How fast would have the limousine been going had it continued on Elm? Or do you really not know?

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #263 on: September 12, 2018, 01:03:23 AM »
So you can show that CE 573 is relevant in the EAW shooting?
You're the guy who's been asserting that there's "NO chain of custody for it." That's a very specific claim. And the burden of proof for it is your burden.

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #264 on: September 12, 2018, 01:04:22 AM »
What a lame response. It has everything to do with the WC's claim that YOU support. Why can't you show that CE 573 is relevant as claimed?

This is a classic example of shifting the burden that LNers employ constantly to cover for the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC's claims they support wholeheartedly.
Did I ever say that CE 573 "was relevant"?

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #265 on: September 12, 2018, 01:14:08 AM »
What a lame response. It has everything to do with the WC's claim that YOU support. Why can't you show that CE 573 is relevant as claimed?

This is a classic example of shifting the burden that LNers employ constantly to cover for the fact that they have NO supporting evidence for the WC's claims they support wholeheartedly.
You are the guy who claimed that there is "NO [you like to capitalize that for some reason] chain of possession for CE573." Not just, "the chain of possession is weak" or "the chain of possession is muddled" or "the chain of possession has gaps" or anything but, "there is NO chain of possession." Again, that's a very specific, direct, and unambiguous assertion. It's your assertion, so it's up to you to present a supporting case for it. It's pretty funny that you constantly try to shift the burden onto others, and when they point out that you're responsible for your assertions, you complain that the are trying to shift the burden on you. Well, that's where the burden should lie in this case. You. 

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3419
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #266 on: September 12, 2018, 02:13:05 AM »
So you offer opinion instead of evidence. No surprise there. It is clear that you cannot support the WC's claim.

So you dodge the relatively rare usage of 'chain of evidence' at trial. No surprise there. The opinion I quoted pretty much renders moot the never-ending story you lot cling to regarding chain of evidence. 

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #267 on: September 12, 2018, 02:27:40 AM »
Rob, Can't you see that Lee was involved in the Walker hoax?     How much evidence do you need to convince you that the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax....And Lee Oswald was involved...

Walt, there is NO evidence showing that LHO was involved in the EAW shooting. It doesn't matter if it was a hoax or not. The evidence is the evidence.

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #268 on: September 12, 2018, 02:31:49 AM »
Where have we been? Well, we've been here all along! Waiting, (with baited breath, even!) for you to reveal how "the turns were an excuse for why the motorcade didn't speed up?"  How fast would have the limousine been going had it continued on Elm? Or do you really not know?

Shifting the burden again. There were TWO viable options that did NOT require those two drastic turns. Your beloved WC claimed in 1964 that the turns were needed, but like almost all their claims they failed to support it.

It is apparent that you cannot support their claim either.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2018, 02:33:47 AM by Rob Caprio »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3419
Re: Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?
« Reply #269 on: September 12, 2018, 02:35:08 AM »
I don't believe Rob is making any argument about its admissibility.  Since there will never be a trial, that's irrelevant.  What Rob is arguing is that without a proper documented chain of custody, there's no way to have any confidence that CE 573 was pulled from Walker's wall or had anything to do with the events of April 10.

Since there will never be a trial, by default forums such as this become courts of public opinion. At least that's what you and buddies act like... what with your constant demanding instant proof of murder on single things that we don't claim to be proof of murder on their own.

I contend that Bugliosi's statement re chain of evidence is valid in the court of public opinion.

 

Mobile View