Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A straight line  (Read 112021 times)

Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: A straight line
« Reply #344 on: March 19, 2018, 04:26:54 PM »
Advertisement
Tim, I think you meant don't find people guilty or innocent?

They only determine whether there's sufficient evidence - "probable cause" - to bring charges against someone.


Never mind. It was corrected.

I do find this interesting: LBJ was a bad man therefore he killed JFK.

What did LBJ do after becoming president? He passed civil rights (two of them), a voting rights bill, a fair housing bill, poverty programs, he ended Operation Mongoose and the covert war on Cuba.....

Yes, as Caro documented in his books - and as he himself said - LBJ was a horrible, despicable person. Nobody denies that. But that is not evidence of his involvement in the assassination. Besides, he would have to have underlings pull off this act of treason. The conspiracy crowd likes to cry Hoover! and LBJ! and other awful people as if that is sufficient alone to prove their involvement. Sorry, that's not enough.

Anyway, LBJ's post assassination acts are hardly those of right wing militarists who killed JFK to promote their malevolent agenda.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2018, 07:19:29 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #344 on: March 19, 2018, 04:26:54 PM »


Offline Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 994
Re: A straight line
« Reply #345 on: March 19, 2018, 04:39:45 PM »
Ray, Grand Juries do NOT find people guilty or not guilty.

You'd better send an e mail to Viewzone, Tim.

Offline Wesley Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: A straight line
« Reply #346 on: March 19, 2018, 04:52:50 PM »
Wesley, Are sure about that? From a signed 1998 affidavit by Nathan Darby:

7.    Recently I received a photocopy of an inked print along with a
photocopy of a latent print from [ Texas researcher]. After careful
and extended examination of the inked print photocopy and the latent
print photocopy given to me, I have their identifying characteristics
marked and numbered. The inked print is Exhibit DAN #3, and the latent
Print is Exhibit DAN #4.


https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.crime/k8Ji79QRyXk

Tim I am sure at the time Darby said that, that the two prints matched. I'm not disputing that. The only latent print found in the sniper's nest was a palm print collected by the DPD. There was not a latent print of a "little finger print" found. It was all faked by McClellan and Harrison. When they gave the prints to Darby he was not told what or who the belonged to.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #346 on: March 19, 2018, 04:52:50 PM »


Offline Wesley Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: A straight line
« Reply #347 on: March 19, 2018, 04:56:49 PM »
And the evidence for this is.... what exactly?

From the Dallas Police Department Martin. Look it up. I did. If you deny the DPD collected a latent palm print from the 6th floor sniper's nest then by implication you are saying there was a conspiracy. Are you ready to come down off of that fence?

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: A straight line
« Reply #348 on: March 19, 2018, 05:11:35 PM »

From the Dallas Police Department Martin. Look it up. I did. If you deny the DPD collected a latent palm print from the 6th floor sniper's nest then by implication you are saying there was a conspiracy. Are you ready to come down off of that fence?


Translation: I am too lazy or unable to support the claims I make... Pathetic

You claimed;


Tim, McClellan and Harrison gave Darby an old fingerprint of Wallace's along with an old fingerprint card with Wallace's print on it. They never gave Darby the real latent palm print from the TSBD 6th floor. It was all a fake.


which has nothing to do with what's in the DPD files or not.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2018, 05:16:08 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #348 on: March 19, 2018, 05:11:35 PM »


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: A straight line
« Reply #349 on: March 19, 2018, 05:38:32 PM »
Tim, I think you meant don't find people guilty or innocent?

They only determine whether there's sufficient evidence - "probable cause" - to bring charges against someone.

I do find this interesting: LBJ was a bad man therefore he killed JFK.

What did LBJ do after becoming president? He passed civil rights (two of them), a voting rights bill, a fair housing bill, poverty programs, he ended Operation Mongoose and the covert war on Cuba.....

Yes, as Caro documented in his books - and as he himself said - LBJ was a horrible, despicable person. Nobody denies that. But that is not evidence of his involvement in the assassination. Besides, he would have to have underlings pull off this act of treason. The conspiracy crowd likes to cry Hoover! and LBJ! and other awful people as if that is sufficient alone to prove their involvement. Sorry, that's not enough.

Anyway, LBJ's post assassination acts are hardly those of right wing militarists who killed JFK to promote their malevolent agenda.

Steve, I edited my post four minutes before this post of yours.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: A straight line
« Reply #350 on: March 19, 2018, 05:40:13 PM »
You'd better send an e mail to Viewzone, Tim.

What for? That article is full of errors. I'm not going to waste my time correcting every damn fool on the internet.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A straight line
« Reply #350 on: March 19, 2018, 05:40:13 PM »


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: A straight line
« Reply #351 on: March 19, 2018, 05:42:21 PM »
Tim I am sure at the time Darby said that, that the two prints matched. I'm not disputing that. The only latent print found in the sniper's nest was a palm print collected by the DPD. There was not a latent print of a "little finger print" found. It was all faked by McClellan and Harrison. When they gave the prints to Darby he was not told what or who the belonged to.

Wesley, my point is that Darby wasn't given an actual print of Wallace's to compare with his known prints. He was given a photocopy of Wallace's fingerprint.