Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[Jerry Organ]

I will give you this. If I had been on that jury and a prosecutor had brought me such a weak, superficial case, the accused would have walked in the same way O.J. did; not because he was guilty or not but simply because the prosecutor failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

For Martin, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means LN evidence has to have been captured on Hollywood-quality movie stock, or it can be verified personally through time travel. Normal standards of evidence gathering and forensic evaluation are not adequate.

Meanwhile his own all-out-of-proportion extrapolation of a cherry-picked notebook passage and Comic Book Vision Specs Rowland's months-old memory reconstruction with over-the-top detail is supposed to be "proof" to some jury. Maybe plays to the Coast-to-Coast-AM audience.

[Jerry Freeman]

For Martin, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means LN evidence has to have been captured on Hollywood-quality movie stock, or it can be verified personally through time travel. Normal standards of evidence gathering and forensic evaluation are not adequate.
Meanwhile his own all-out-of-proportion extrapolation of a cherry-picked notebook passage and Comic Book Vision Specs Rowland's months-old memory reconstruction with over-the-top detail is supposed to be "proof" to some jury. Maybe plays to the Coast-to-Coast-AM audience.

ChapSmithOrganitis...it's apparently quite contagious

[Charles Collins]

Which only tells me that you don't know what a hypothetical question is.

And please do not consider the mockery trial to be anything like the real thing

If something is hypothetical, it is based on possible ideas or situations rather than actual ones. Bugs is asking about the actual situation, not a possible one.

[Martin Weidmann]

For Martin, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means LN evidence has to have been captured on Hollywood-quality movie stock, or it can be verified personally through time travel. Normal standards of evidence gathering and forensic evaluation are not adequate.

Meanwhile his own all-out-of-proportion extrapolation of a cherry-picked notebook passage and Comic Book Vision Specs Rowland's months-old memory reconstruction with over-the-top detail is supposed to be "proof" to some jury. Maybe plays to the Coast-to-Coast-AM audience.

For Martin, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means LN evidence has to have been captured on Hollywood-quality movie stock, or it can be verified personally through time travel.

Those are your words and they are beyond idiotic. But then, I would not expect anything less from a die hard LN who can not produce any conclusive evidence and then whines about not being believed on his word alone.

Normal standards of evidence gathering and forensic evaluation are not adequate.

It seems you don't have a clue about the normal standards of evidence. OJ walked free for exactly the same reason that guys like you don't understand.

Meanwhile his own all-out-of-proportion extrapolation of a cherry-picked notebook passage and Comic Book Vision Specs Rowland's months-old memory reconstruction with over-the-top detail is supposed to be "proof" to some jury. Maybe plays to the Coast-to-Coast-AM audience.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Maybe you're in the wrong movie..... or you're just confused.

[Martin Weidmann]

If something is hypothetical, it is based on possible ideas or situations rather than actual ones. Bugs is asking about the actual situation, not a possible one.

So, Oswald carrying the bag protruding out is an actual situation?

OK, genius, prove it.

[Alan Ford]

[Charles Collins]

So, Oswald carrying the bag protruding out is an actual situation?

OK, genius, prove it.

Bugs was asking about the actual situation that Frazier was in. Specifically, what he couldn’t see or determine from his vantage point.

[Richard Smith]

That is what we call "evidence."

Yes I know, that's what is so sad about it. It shows us all that you confuse opinions, assumptions and speculation with actual evidence.

The bag found on the 6th floor actually exists.  It is a real thing.  Not an assumption or speculation.  Your shorter bag is the one that is missing.  It can't be accounted for in any way except your imagination.  The bag found on the 6th floor not only exists.  It also has Oswald's prints on it.  It was found next to the SN.  The crime scene.  There is no work-related purpose for it to be there.  No one else who worked in that building ever explained why that bag was there or claimed it or explained its presence there.  There is only one explanation for that bag.  Only one.  You know it.  There is no debate outside nutty Internet forums that this bag contained Oswald's rifle.