Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket

[Gary Craig]

This is your so called American Justice, I can murder someone in broad daylight in front of eyewitnesses and then get seen running away by almost a dozen people, most of which see me with the same type of gun that killed the man, drop shells that match my revolver, whack the Police Officer that tries to search me, then I try and kill him too and all I need is Iacoletti Inc. to misrepresent the eyewitnesses and I'm magically innocent. Holy WOW Batman!

JohnM

You are innocent until proven guilty.

In American Justice when you get accused of crimes you have the right to legal representation to

protect your rights and present exculpatory evidence at trial etc.

It also requires LE to keep the defendant safe while in custody.

 etc. etc. etc.

[Martin Weidmann]

Presumption of innocence applies to a jury not presuming the defendant is guilty just because he's on trial. Otherwise the judge can't claim it's a fair trial.

Jury members can presume the defendant is guilty, innocent or be neutral about it. There's no way to perceive or enforce what human beings on a jury are thinking.

Which is why there is the process of jury selection...

[Martin Weidmann]

One can only ask what a potential juror thinks, and hope for an honest response. One can't perceive or enforce a juror's impartiality because they can't see what's in their mind.

True.. that's why nobody can really predict what the outcome of a trial by jury is going to be.

[Bill Brown]

LOL, the goofy Bill Brown diversion question - classic.

Ozzie's accusers (look in the mirror) are the ones claiming he was wearing a jacket a size too big.

Why do I need to prove it?

I'm asking for validation in the form of a affidavit, testimony or anything else from one of the dozen

witnesses who allegedly saw him wearing the jacket.

A least one of them should have noticed.

What are you talking about?  Ted Callaway, just for quick reference, positively identified the jacket (CE-162) as being the one that Oswald had on as he ran down Patton.

[Bill Chapman]

LNers would be wise to refer to the 'killer' or 'prime suspect' rather than Oswald. Otherwise all these arguments go nowhere. CTers have a point-of-view as well.

'We don't see things as they are; we see things as WE are'--- Anais Nin

[Bill Brown]

LNers would be wise to refer to the 'killer' or 'prime suspect' rather than Oswald. Otherwise all these arguments go nowhere. CTers have a point-of-view as well.

'We don't see things as they are; we see things as WE are'--- Anais Nin

I do, many times.  But for Callaway's purposes, I named Oswald because Callaway knew it was Oswald.

[Bill Chapman]

Don't be stupid how can you accept the above!!! because Brewer even lied by saying he never met Oswald before 22.11.63 when in fact he had previously sold Oswald the very shoes that he was wearing on the day

Pretty sure Brewer said he didn't know the man's NAME before 11.22.63:

'Well, in the first place, I had seen him some place before. I think he had been in my store before. And when you wait on somebody, you recognize them' -- Brewer

He obviously recognized the man at his store window by sight only. He didn't yet know him by name. He made that clear in his WC testimony.