Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Lincoln Assassination Status: a Still Open or Reopenable FBI Investigation?  (Read 2743 times)

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
Note that I've added to my original post before reading this

In the meantime, Oswald was the only person on the face of the planet as being seen at the scenes of both crimes

Define "being seen".  Actually Captain Westbrook was not only at both scenes, but he was at the scene when the jacket was found and at the theater for the arrest.  Not bad for a personnel officer.

JFK Assassination Forum


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
Witnesses who saw AnybodyButOswald shoot Kennedy: ZERO

Is that supposed to prove that Oswald did it?

Witnesses who saw AnybodyButBillChapman shoot Kennedy: ZERO

Quote
Persons other than the shooter who knew an attempt on Kennedy was going to be made that day: ZERO

How could you possibly know that for a fact?

Quote
Leaving a wedding ring in a cup is evidence that he left his wedding ring in a cup. Taken at face value, in a vacuum, BFD. You don't live in a vacuum, do you John.

Taken in conjunction with other evidence:  also BFD.  It means he left his ring in a cup and you're left to speculate in hindsight on the reasons.

Online Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2750
Define "being seen".  Actually Captain Westbrook was not only at both scenes, but he was at the scene when the jacket was found and at the theater for the arrest.  Not bad for a personnel officer.

 ::)

Not that you're riding the semantics seesaw
>>> On the scene during the shootings.

Westbrook was there during the Tippit shooting?
News to me.

Oh, btw... Did Oswald demand a jacket to wear at any of the lineups? ;)
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 09:38:55 PM by Bill Chapman »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
Again with the false equivalacies, but not at all surprising coming from Strawman "Richard".

Booth's diary was found on his person, not identified as his handwriting via 2 block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order blank.

Because you don't have any actual evidence that Oswald shot anybody, so you have to resort to gymnastics over the purchase of the weapon.

I'm speechless at your inability to read.  I said that the theatre full of people saw him leap from the balcony.

False equivalence.  Booth was a famous actor who theater patrons knew well.  Oswald was identified in unfair rigged lineups by people who didn't know him and described him differently.

Booth was seen in the theater box with a gun in his hand immediately after Lincoln was shot.  Oswald was seen in a different location a couple minutes after JFK was shot with no gun in his hand.  See how that works?

Nobody saw Oswald do anything.  It's not surprising that you don't see the difference, because to you speculation is considered evidence.

Cool.  Any evidence of this mental instability in 1865?  Clara Harris and Mary Todd were in the presidential box too.

Witnesses who saw Oswald shoot JFK:  ZERO

The only reason you have to pretend you know that it was "Oswald's rifle" is because you don't have anything else.  In Booth's case they had eyewitnesses. They had accomplices.  They had a diary.  They didn't have to resort to nonsense like "he left his ring in a cup" as "evidence".

Booth:  Sic Semper Tyrannis
Oswald: I really don't know what the situation is about. Nobody has told me anything.

But if you want to make a case for reasonable doubt in Lincoln's murder, then knock yourself out.  It does nothing to advance your case against Oswald.

Quote
Booth's diary was found on his person

Oswald's wallet containing Hidell ID was found on Oswald's person.

Quote
Because you don't have any actual evidence that Oswald shot anybody,

And unless you have evidence that someone saw some guy actually pull the trigger then you got nothing.

Quote
so you have to resort to gymnastics over the purchase of the weapon.

How is following a paper/evidence trail that leads from Kleins records straight to the 6th floor of Oswald's building "gymnastics"?

Quote
I said that the theatre full of people saw him leap from the balcony.

Saw "who" jump from the balcony, was this person ever positively identified in an "unfair lineup"? -giggle-

Quote
Oswald was identified in unfair rigged lineups

An unfair rigged lineup contains only 1 person who is holding the weapon, Oswald's lineup's were nothing like that.

Quote
Booth was seen in the theater box with a gun in his hand immediately after Lincoln was shot.

In a darkened theater, what could they possibly see?

Quote
Oswald was seen in a different location a couple minutes after JFK was shot with no gun in his hand.  See how that works?

Oops, Brennan saw Oswald in the sniper's nest, you know the sniper's nest with Oswald fresh prints on the recently moved rifle rest box.

Quote
Nobody saw Oswald do anything.

See above and don't forget when Oswald was approached by Police Officers he struck McDonald and then tried to kill McDonald with his revolver.

Quote
Witnesses who saw Oswald shoot JFK:  ZERO

No, see above.

Quote
In Booth's case they had eyewitnesses.

Eyewitnesses who didn't see some guy actually pull the trigger? LOL!

Quote
They had a diary.

What, so the handwriting analysis is based on an "unscientific" opinion, you gotta do better than that.

Quote
Booth:  Sic Semper Tyrannis

Oswald: Well, it's all over now

Quote
But if you want to make a case for reasonable doubt in Lincoln's murder, then knock yourself out.  It does nothing to advance your case against Oswald.

No, it's just fun exposing a lazy contrarian who applies Polar different conclusions to essentially the same type of evidence.

JohnM

« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 10:08:32 PM by John Mytton »

Offline Michael Walton

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
So let me get this straight. Many of the people on this board who just can't see any conspiracy having taken place in the JFK assassination are now also saying that there WAS a conspiracy in the Lincoln assassination?

And I thought there already WAS a conspiracy with Mary Stuart(?) and others and they were hanged?

Hahahahaha! There are many, many people out there with some truly weird ways of thinking! OMG! No wonder this country is going down the tubes!

JFK Assassination Forum


Online Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2750
Define "being seen".  Actually Captain Westbrook was not only at both scenes, but he was at the scene when the jacket was found and at the theater for the arrest.  Not bad for a personnel officer.

Westbrook was at City Hall during the assassination.
Westbrook arrived at the Tippit scene after the fact.

You wouldn't be trying to spin the Texas Theater/Tippit scenes as being the 'both scenes' I'm talking about (see above) now would you John?

« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 11:49:21 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
So let me get this straight. Many of the people on this board who just can't see any conspiracy having taken place in the JFK assassination are now also saying that there WAS a conspiracy in the Lincoln assassination?

And I thought there already WAS a conspiracy with Mary Stuart(?) and others and they were hanged?

Hahahahaha! There are many, many people out there with some truly weird ways of thinking! OMG! No wonder this country is going down the tubes!

Seriously? You're missing the point entirely, it's not about who killed who, it's about double standards and the CT's contradictory application of evidence. And btw this is just a surface level analysis, we still haven't started attacking eyewitnesses yet. Muhahaha!

JohnM
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 10:31:34 PM by John Mytton »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Michael Walton

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
John M:

"Seriously..."

-----------


I'm going to agree with you here but it really does go both ways with this case, John. There are some outrageous claims with CTers out there. To name a few:

The body being squirreled away from Parkland, dropped down into the cargo hold, whisked away on a thrumming helicopter at Andrews, and all manner of body manipulations by mad doctors with scalpels at the ready. All - for what...?

When the Z film shows that a single shooter supposedly pulls off a super human feat of marksmanship - one that has never been duplicated during controlled conditions - and yet we have crazies saying that the Z film needed FURTHER doctoring to cover up - what...?

When it's decided by secret agents with rain coats on and collars pulled up, decide to pluck a Hungarian kid from the streets post WWII - and his mother to boot - bring them back and train them to be secret agents and lookalikes of Lee Oswald, a mere nobody, and continue this charade for 16 years until 11/22. All - for what...?

I could go on, but you should get the gist of it.

On the other side of the coin, though, John, there are way too many inconsistencies with the official version, that same version you support unquestioned. To boot:

We're expected to believe Oswald was a raving leftist like McVeigh was a right-wing crazy who actually had a Sic Tyrants shirt on when he was arrested? Yet, Oswald denied doing any of the shootings he was accused of. We'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt but he never got his day in court with a good team of lawyers behind him.

And, oh yeah, for someone who supposedly did this to get back at America in some crazy way - why in the world was he still wearing his USMC ring? Oops. As a leftist, and with all things that ring represents, you'd think he would have thrown that away years ago.

We're expected to believe that three clean shots fired from the so-called sniper lair hit, then missed, then hit again, yet a trained Secret Service agent described a "flurry of shells" coming into the car?

We're expected to believe that the so-called missed shot hit way, way down the street? I mean WAY DOWN there all the way to where the underpass is, kicking up chips and hitting Tague?

We're expected to believe that all of these clean shots somehow nicked the windshield causing damage to it?

We're expected to believe that Oswald waltzed over and wiped down his rifle, stuffed it pretty well between boxes to hide it, then skipped down to the 2nd floor to be found calmly sipping a Coca Cola a minute and a half after the shooting? And yet, this raving madman forgot to pick up the shells but took the time to wipe the weapon down and try to hide it? If he was making a statement, why not just throw the weapon down in the lair, leaving his prints on it and the shells there too?

We're expected to believe that after murdering a policeman, Oswald throws his wallet down at the scene, ejects his shells as he walks away from the scene, takes off his jacket as he leaves? And yet, when arrested they pull out a second wallet from his pocket. So what was this...some extraordinary sleigh of hand?

I could go on, but you get the gist of it.

I think the biggest thing about this case is the incredible bias of folks who simply don't like Kennedy, the Kennedy family in general, or whatever warped thinking they have that will always block rational thought. I get that - folks think he was a playboy; the family is too rich; the father was crooked; and so on. And yeah, I'm going to put it out here now - Kennedy seemed like a good guy, but he did escalate the number of soldiers in Viet Nam and he and his brother both signed off on surveilling Martin Luther King, all the while inviting him to the WH after his speech on 8/28/63. So yeah, despite what those who worship Kennedy say, he does leave much to be desired.

But just because you don't like someone or hate their family, it doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a fair and rational investigation into his murder. Further, when you're biased, that biased thought is going to keep anyone from giving the narrative of the murder any rational thought.

If you take all of that bias away, there are way too many coincidences and oddities for it to be mere happenstance, John. Life in general just doesn't happen that way.

'Night John Boy. 'Night Mary Ellen.


JFK Assassination Forum


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
::)

Not that you're riding the semantics seesaw
>>> On the scene during the shootings.

And by "on the scene", you mean somewhere in the TSBD building?  That's useful.

Quote
Oh, btw... Did Oswald demand a jacket to wear at any of the lineups? ;)

Relevance?

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6769
Oswald's wallet containing Hidell ID was found on Oswald's person.

Unfortunately this ID (that nobody mentioned in any report or interview before Oswald was dead) is not a confession to killing anyone.

Quote
And unless you have evidence that someone saw some guy actually pull the trigger then you got nothing.

Are you trying to claim that there is just as much evidence against Oswald as against Booth?

Quote
How is following a paper/evidence trail that leads from Kleins records straight to the 6th floor of Oswald's building "gymnastics"?

Because there is no "paper/evidence trail that leads from Kleins records straight to the 6th floor".

Quote
Saw "who" jump from the balcony, was this person ever positively identified in an "unfair lineup"? -giggle-

No.  Those were the purview of the Dallas PD.

Quote
An unfair rigged lineup contains only 1 person who is holding the weapon, Oswald's lineup's were nothing like that.

They might as well have been one person holding a weapon.

- The fillers were not chosen to resemble the witnesses' descriptions of the perpetrator
- There were only 3 fillers for the lineups and no fillers for the photo identifications
- The fillers were not dressed like Oswald
- The fillers were not dressed to match witnesses' descriptions of the perpetrator
- The person administering the lineup knew which person in the lineup was the suspect
- The witnesses did not view the lineups separately
- Some witnesses knew which man was the suspect before they attended the lineup
- Not all of the men were handcuffed together for the first lineup
- Witnesses were influenced by the physical appearances of both Oswald and the fillers
- Witnesses were influenced by Oswald's complaints about the fairness of the lineups
- Witnesses were intimidated or pressured by the authorities
- Witnesses were asked to sign affidavits which would include who they picked in the lineup before actually viewing the lineup
- The criminal justice system in Dallas County had a history of railroading suspects

Quote
In a darkened theater, what could they possibly see?

Evidence that Ford's theater was darkened?  I guess you didn't know about the witness who saw Booth enter the presidential box either.

Quote
Oops, Brennan saw Oswald in the sniper's nest, you know the sniper's nest with Oswald fresh prints on the recently moved rifle rest box.



Quote
See above and don't forget when Oswald was approached by Police Officers he struck McDonald and then tried to kill McDonald with his revolver.

Evidence that Oswald "tried to kill McDonald with his revolver"?  And what does that have to do with who killed the president?

Quote
What, so the handwriting analysis is based on an "unscientific" opinion, you gotta do better than that.

What handwriting analysis?  Why are you so desperately trying to equate two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy from microfilm found 1000 miles away with a diary containing a confession found on somebody's person?  And then there were his accomplices...

Quote
Oswald: Well, it's all over now

Yes, McDonald had a habit of embellishing things that nobody else could attest to.

Quote
No, it's just fun exposing a lazy contrarian who applies Polar different conclusions to essentially the same type of evidence.

"Essentially the same type of evidence" is blatantly dishonest and self-serving.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2019, 07:21:51 PM by John Iacoletti »

JFK Assassination Forum


 

Mobile View