Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"  (Read 7091 times)

Online David Von Pein

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2022, 02:21:22 AM »
Advertisement
Do you, David, know of any evidence that puts Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and/or that he did indeed come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot?

Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day--including 11/22/63--please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there---especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.

No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2022, 02:42:00 AM by David Von Pein »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2022, 02:21:22 AM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2022, 04:25:01 AM »
Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day--including 11/22/63--please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there---especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.

No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.

That outta set IaLOLetti's (aka Nick Beef) hair on fire

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2022, 05:05:48 AM »
How about a simple example for our contrarians?  Let's say there were three people named Martin, Roger, and Otto who all lived in Dallas and left their wedding rings at home on 11.22.63.  Would this alone make them suspects in the assassination?  Of course not.  No one ever has ever made this claim about Oswald.  But suppose "Martin" also worked in the building from which the shots were fired, his rifle is found there, his prints were on the SN boxes, rifle, and long bag, he had no credible alibi, fled the scene, got a gun, shot a policer officer, resisted arrest, and told the DPD numerous lies.

In fact, none of those thing are evidence of murder, even if you could actually show that they are true (which you cannot).

Quote
Martin's act of leaving his wedding ring at home that very day gains greater significance in the totality of context with the other evidence and circumstances.

No, the “significance” is in the imagination of the person who has just decided that it must be significant.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2022, 05:23:30 AM by John Iacoletti »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2022, 05:05:48 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2022, 05:08:34 AM »
Here we have another CTer who is incapable of "Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22.

Doing “unusual” things is not evidence of murder. It’s what people who don’t have any good evidence appeal to and hope that their rhetoric will be persuasive anyway. It’s a form of pounding the table.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2022, 05:22:54 AM »
Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And Howard Brennan failed to make a positive ID in a lineup that was egregiously unfair and biased to begin with, even after seeing Oswald on TV, and embellished his story more and more every time he told it — whether WC fanatics like it or not.

But just so we’re clear, Brennan’s belated “certainty” is your only evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor during the shooting, right? Unlike “Richard”, are you willing to admit that?

Quote
And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM,

And if it’s not to be believed (and there are good reasons not to) then that means there is no reason to believe that Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 — one of those reasons being, what plausible way could he have gotten down in that timeframe unnoticed? You’re coming dangerously close to “Richard’s” insipid argument that the evidence Oswald came down the stairs in about 75 seconds unnoticed by at least 12 people along the way is that it happened.

Quote
Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not.

Even if you could establish that as a fact (and you cannot), that tells you exactly nothing about where Oswald was at 12:30. You can’t even establish that rifle as the murder weapon, much less who owned it. Being “stubborn” has nothing to do with it. You don’t have the goods, and false bravado hardly makes up for it.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2022, 05:33:03 AM by John Iacoletti »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2022, 05:22:54 AM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2022, 07:07:07 AM »
The murder weapon is not necessarily needed to convict in this case, the lights on the stairway were dangerously dim, the stairs themselves were creaky as hell, Garner said there was chaos and confusion everywhere, and Brennan died years before his book was even published, leaving his writer wannabe plenty of time to 'get creative'.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2022, 12:02:33 PM »
Yes. That evidence is "Howard Brennan".

I know CTers will forever toss Mr. Brennan into the nearest gutter, practically treating him as if he had witnessed nothing at all in Dealey Plaza, but Brennan's Warren Commission testimony will forever be part of the record of the JFK case, whether conspiracists like it or not.

And if Brennan's WC testimony and positive identification of Oswald as the assassin is to be believed (and I think it is), then that means Lee Oswald was on the sixth floor with a gun at 12:30 PM, which also therefore has to mean he did manage to get from the sixth floor down to the second floor (unnoticed) in less than (approx.) 90 seconds, because we know (via Roy S. Truly's verification) that Oswald did encounter Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in the lunchroom at approximately 12:32 PM.

Plus, of course, there's also the circumstantial evidence of the JFK murder weapon positively being the C2766 Carcano rifle that was found on the 6th floor. And that's a rifle that was owned by Lee Oswald, whether stubborn CTers want to admit that fact or not. And on any given day--including 11/22/63--please tell me who is MORE likely to be using OSWALD'S gun if not Lee Oswald himself? That's very good circumstantial evidence right there---especially when it's ADDED TO Howard Brennan's Warren Commission testimony.

No conspiracy believer, however, wants to face up to the fact that the "rifle" evidence is, in fact, excellent circumstantial evidence pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the President's murderer.

In other words all you really have as "evidence" are basically two assumptions, of which one is based on a large number of other assumptions.

Any lawyer will tell you that witness testimony is the most unreliable evidence there is. Nevertheless you assume that Brennan's "identification" of Oswald during his WC testimony, months later, is more reliable than his initial failure to identify Oswald in a line up. There is no reason, other than wishful thinking, to place more value on the belated "identification". Even more so because the testimony was given several months later after Brennan, just like everybody else, had been exposed to continuous media reports declaring Oswald's alleged guilt. In addition, Brennan has been proven to be lying about what he was doing when the second shot was fired. He claimed he looked up to the TSBD window, but the Zapruder film shows that he actually was looking at the motorcade. He also lied about where on the wall he was sitting. He claimed he was facing the main entrance of the TSBD (which would place him on Elm street) but photographic evidence show he was in fact sitting facing Houston with his back to Dealey Plaza.

The second assumption you make is that the rifle found at the TSBD belonged to Oswald. The only justification for that assumption is the opinion of one FBI expert who claimed the Klein's order form was written by Oswald. Never mind that another FBI expert (I can't recall his name instantly) later stated that the handwriting sample (and the fact that the documents were photocopies) made it impossible to make such a determination with any kind of certainty. You also have to assume that Klein's did in fact send a rifle and Oswald received it. There is no evidence for either, expect that Waldman stated that a circle around the letters "PP" (on Waldman 7) means a rifle was send. Next you have to assume that Oswald ordered the rifle for himself and kept it in his possession between March and November 1963, which means that you also have to assume that the rifle allegedly stored in Ruth Paine's garage was indeed C2766. There isn't corroborating evidence for any of it.

What it basically comes down to is this; if I register a weapon in your name and leave it behind at a crime scene some six months later, would that be evidence that you were at that crime scene?

You are of course aware of the fact that Jesse Curry is on record saying that they never had any conclusive evidence that placed Oswald on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, right? And that fact that Robert Tanenbaum, the former prosecutor and deputy chief counsel of the HSCA, has said that the evidence there was against Oswald was insufficient to secure a conviction.

Your cherry picked "evidence" is paper thin and in fact highly inconclusive.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2022, 12:02:33 PM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4992
Re: Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2022, 01:47:00 PM »
"Adding Up" the various unusual things that Lee Oswald did on 11/21 and 11/22

Translation for "adding up" is making assumptions to "connect" one thing somehow "unusual" with another thing somehow "unusual".

But perhaps you can help us out here, David.

For about six months now, I have been asking Richard Smith to provide evidence for his claims that (1) Oswald was on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and (2) that he came down the stairs unnoticed within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot. Richard told me to look at up in the WC report, but I couldn't find any evidence to support either claim in Chapter 4, which deals with the assassin.

All I could find is that the WC somehow considered the presence of the MC rifle (allegedly bought by Oswald) on the 6th floor as proof that Oswald was there when the shots were fired, which is, on so many levels, completely absurd.

Do you, David, know of any evidence that puts Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD when the shots were fired and/or that he did indeed come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds of the last shot?

"All" Martin can find is that Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene!  HA HA HA.  Imagine any other crime in history where the weapon was left at the crime scene and can be linked to an individual who was known to be in building, who fled the scene, shot a police officer, had no credible alibi and then lied to the police about his ownership of the rifle.  What a mystery to solve!  But that is "all" the evidence we have.  There is no HD film of Oswald pulling the trigger or a time machine to prove it.  So it is all just an "assumption" in the contrarian fantasy world!  And it's just an amazing string of bad luck that Oswald was the only TSBD employee who "worked in the building" who left his prints on the SN boxes, left his wedding ring and a large amount of money with his wife, made an unusual visit to the location where his rifle was kept the night before the assassination, carried his lunch in a bag over two feet long, looked exactly like the assassin and Tippit murderer according to several witnesses.  So much bad luck that day!
« Last Edit: December 16, 2022, 01:52:59 PM by Richard Smith »