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

Author Topic: Humor me  (Read 8782 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
Re: Humor me
« Reply #110 on: March 30, 2019, 06:33:59 AM »
Totality of circumstantial evidence and Oswald?s consciousness of guilt are two issues conspiracy nuts can not over come. Those are the facts.

?Consciousness of guilt? isn?t a ?fact?, it?s confirmation bias. Pot, kettle.

Quote
Your own ignorance in stating a direct evidence case is stronger one more time shows those reading this exchange understand your inability to reason critically and demonstrates once again your total ignorance of the evidence in this case. You seek confirmation bias as the majority of ignorant people do. You cannot even garner support on this thread. 

Of course a direct evidence case is stronger. Circumstantial evidence is all judgment calls and assumptions.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2019, 06:39:36 AM by John Iacoletti »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
Re: Humor me
« Reply #111 on: March 30, 2019, 06:38:16 AM »
You state above I?m a ?frequent? poster.  You and I joined this forum within two days of one another.  Since,I have posted 194 times.

Why have you even posted 194 times if you ?no longer play that game??

Offline Peter Kleinschmidt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
Re: Humor me
« Reply #112 on: March 30, 2019, 06:50:15 AM »
The late Gary Mack sums it up nicely:  ?there may have been a conspiracy to kill JFK, but I cannot prove it nor can anybody else?.
Wow! I am so impressed that you would choose a genius to quote from like Gary "I changed my mind more than a woman" Mack. How long did it take you to dig that one up? Be honest

Online Paul May

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Re: Humor me
« Reply #113 on: March 30, 2019, 06:52:52 AM »
Why have you even posted 194 times if you ?no longer play that game??

Why do you routinely ask the dumbest questions on this forum?  And that?s saying something.

Online Paul May

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Re: Humor me
« Reply #114 on: March 30, 2019, 07:00:25 AM »
?Consciousness of guilt? isn?t a ?fact?, it?s confirmation bias. Pot, kettle.

Of course a direct evidence case is stronger. Circumstantial evidence is all judgment calls and assumptions.

In practice, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence in that it can come from multiple sources that check and reinforce each other. Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate at times, and many persons have been convicted on the basis of perjured or otherwise mistaken testimony.  Thus, strong circumstantial evidence can provide a more reliable basis for a verdict. Circumstantial evidence normally requires a witness, such as the police officer who found the evidence, or an expert who examined it, to lay the foundation for its admission. This witness, sometimes known as the sponsor or the authenticating witness, is giving direct (eyewitness) testimony, and could present credibility problems in the same way that any eyewitness does

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
Re: Humor me
« Reply #115 on: March 30, 2019, 07:00:38 AM »
Why do you routinely ask the dumbest questions on this forum?  And that?s saying something.

Why are you routinely unable to answer the dumbest questions on this forum?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
Re: Humor me
« Reply #116 on: March 30, 2019, 07:09:51 AM »
In practice, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence in that it can come from multiple sources that check and reinforce each other.

Not in this case.

Quote
Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate at times, and many persons have been convicted on the basis of perjured or otherwise mistaken testimony.  Thus, strong circumstantial evidence can provide a more reliable basis for a verdict. Circumstantial evidence normally requires a witness, such as the police officer who found the evidence,

That is eyewitness testimony, just not of the crime, and has all the same problems.

Quote
or an expert who examined it, to lay the foundation for its admission.

?Experts? are just as subject to bias and error as anyone else. In a real trial, this is tempered by having both sides present expert testimony.

Offline Peter Kleinschmidt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
Re: Humor me
« Reply #117 on: March 30, 2019, 09:13:30 AM »
In practice, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence in that it can come from multiple sources that check and reinforce each other. Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate at times, and many persons have been convicted on the basis of perjured or otherwise mistaken testimony.  Thus, strong circumstantial evidence can provide a more reliable basis for a verdict. Circumstantial evidence normally requires a witness, such as the police officer who found the evidence, or an expert who examined it, to lay the foundation for its admission. This witness, sometimes known as the sponsor or the authenticating witness, is giving direct (eyewitness) testimony, and could present credibility problems in the same way that any eyewitness does
Too bad all the evidence was tainted.  You would think there would be more evidence other than LHO was in the DSBD that day.  If Oswald would have survived being shot I wonder how much he would have received for damages. What a terrible couple of days where two individuals were not protected appropriately, how embarrassing and I am sure you would agree.

Online Paul May

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
Re: Humor me
« Reply #118 on: March 30, 2019, 09:11:33 PM »
Why have you even posted 194 times if you ?no longer play that game??

Addiction.  I love reading what you xxxxxx post. Just being honest.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
Re: Humor me
« Reply #119 on: March 30, 2019, 10:17:33 PM »
Addiction.  I love reading what you xxxxxx post. Just being honest.

So when you said you ?no longer play that game?, you didn?t really mean it?

 

Mobile View