Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The preponderance of the evidence  (Read 35996 times)

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #176 on: April 04, 2019, 09:12:01 PM »
Advertisement
Any other mention made of his 'patsy-ness' by Oswald after the initial outburst... hello? Anyone?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #176 on: April 04, 2019, 09:12:01 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #177 on: April 04, 2019, 09:18:01 PM »
I clarified what I meant to say.

Yes, you made it worse?

Now you claim that there was no conspiracy, which is bold statement as well as something you will never be able to know with 100% certainty.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3574
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #178 on: April 04, 2019, 09:25:09 PM »
Yes, you made it worse?

Now you claim that there was no conspiracy, which is bold statement as well as something you will never be able to know with 100% certainty.

I made no such claim. Please stop telling me that I said something that I didn?t.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #178 on: April 04, 2019, 09:25:09 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #179 on: April 04, 2019, 09:27:31 PM »
Because Fritz never said that Oswald refused to pinpoint the actual transaction location.  Did you not read the previous comments?

Did you not read the earlier comments where Martin went on a rant about no one asking Oswald about where he purchased the pistol?
« Last Edit: April 04, 2019, 09:42:04 PM by Bill Chapman »

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #180 on: April 04, 2019, 09:51:43 PM »

I made no such claim. Please stop telling me that I said something that I didn?t.


Huh? That's strange, I could have sworn it was you who said;


Yes a better wording would have been ?there was no conspiracy? instead of he did it alone.


When you agree that a better wording would have been ?there was no conspiracy?, how does that somehow not mean that you agree there was no conspiracy?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #180 on: April 04, 2019, 09:51:43 PM »


Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3574
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #181 on: April 04, 2019, 10:26:37 PM »
Huh? That's strange, I could have sworn it was you who said;

When you agree that a better wording would have been ?there was no conspiracy?, how does that somehow not mean that you agree there was no conspiracy?

The context is that it was part of a sentence. Read the rest of it.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #182 on: April 04, 2019, 10:51:27 PM »
The context is that it was part of a sentence. Read the rest of it.

I did?.

Jack never said anything about a conspiracy and neither John or Jack made any "he did it alone" comment, which according to you would have been better worded by "there was no conspiracy?.

The only person to bring up that there was no conspiracy was you.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #182 on: April 04, 2019, 10:51:27 PM »


Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1094
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #183 on: April 04, 2019, 11:18:18 PM »
Of course he's relying on that.

There's nothing in Fritz's report that says that Oswald refused to tell him where he purchased a revolver.

Or that LHO said anything. He knew his rights. The only sources who said that he said anything are official ones. Without recordings or a stenographic record there is no way to validate what he was claimed to have said.